HomeMy WebLinkAboutCCP 02-19-2002
f,~,
.;
.
.
4:45 P.M.
4:45 P.M.
7:00P.M.
7:30 P.M.
~
~HItLS
..
"-';-o,c'
. . AGENDA'
" " " , " '.' .
CI1YQF ARDENBII.LS, MINNESOTA
CITY.l=.OONCIL WQl{K.SESSI()N ".
.. ".*NO'IT. DATE CHANGE" " , ,
TUESDll.V,"FEBIUTAltY 19, 2002, 4:45 PiM. . ,:.";' ",;'
'CITY HALL C~ CHAMBERS, 1245w;ESt mGIIWA.X~'f" ;'t
, , , ': ,', ' " .- , "-,' ,.- , ",---,' '.- ":',:, ' ,~.-"',' '-, >-,~
I. CaD to ONer .
~'. .
..
2.
Stllff Diseuuion Items
.'.
a. CouunUDity DllY,!llopme11t
1) PJ.."",t.gtZoning
/
.' Mills Corporation .
· Gateway Redev.oopment Enviroon:1ental:Assessnient .<;
W<<ksheet
.PIllnning Commission Appointments
. Stonuwater Management Plan .
· ' Jirdykiewicz property appraisallWlllS '
.,"',
, b.F'l'llIInCOpepartment
.Ii;.
.
.
<'t',
.
;~: 'I"
~. "
"
c. Public W<>rks DwartJUent
~' .PMPschedu1e
d.~tioJ;lDepartment, " ' ,',..
I} Futu:te BOA meeting discusSion for businesssuQ~dy-cri.teria
3., CoufldlCoiDmeDts
.
4. . AdjolJt'i
.The alio'I~~n.esmlly,'Vlll}'~diDg uporflength of iSsue ,discussion;.;
r'. >" J.~{."
,j'
.~
-,: i
_/,,- .-
,
.;:.
e
.-
e
~
~
EN HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: February 11, 2002
TO: Mayor and City Council
Joe Lynch, City Administrator
FROM: Aaron Parrish, City Planner If
SUBJECT: Gateway Environmental Assessment Worksheet
Overview
As part of the approval process for the Gateway Redevelopment at the Northeast quadrant of I-
694 and I-35W, Chesapeake Companies is required to prepare an Environmental Assessment
Worksheet (EA W), The intent of an EA W is to more clearly define and identify any
environmental issues associated with larger developments. The EA W process allows interested
units of government such as MNDOT, the Metropolitan Council, MPCA, and others to assess the
developments potential environmental impacts,
Once the EA W has been distributed for agency review and eomments received, the City of
Arden Hills, the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU), is required to make a determination on
the acceptability of the EA W, If the EA W is determined to be acceptable, nothing further is
required on the part of the City or applicant relative to this matter. If the City determines that the
EA W is not aeeeptable, the City can require that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) be
eompleted, When evaluating the EA W, Minnesota Rules 4410.1700 Subp. 7 require the RGU to
utilize the following criteria when evaluating whether a projeet will have significant
environmental impacts:
. Type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects;
· Cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future proj ects;
· The extent to which environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public
regulatory authority; and
. The extent to which environmental effects can be antieipated and controlled as a result of
other availahle environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project
proposer.
Gateway Environmental Assessment Worksheet Memo
February 12, 2002
Page 2 of2
The EA W submitted to the Environmental Quality Board and various units of government has
been attached for your review, In addition, comments received from MNDOT and the
Metropolitan Council have also been included for your consideration,
This item will be plaeed on the February 25, 2002 Council Agenda for formal consideration, It
is necessary to make a positive or negative declaration regarding the need to prepare and EIS
within 30 days of the comment closing period (February IS, 2002), Unless the Council has any
issues with regard to the EA W that has been prepared, given the limited nature of the comments
received to date from outside agencies staff will prepare a resolution making a negative
declaration with regard to the preparation of an EIS, Please feel free to contact me if you should
have any questions,
Attachments
1. Agency Comments
2. Gateway Environmental Assessment Worksheet
e
e
e
!"""I"~ l
> "
> .
~-J-,. . ?<l
e ,,~
Minnesota Department of Transportation
Metropolitan Division
Waters Edge
1500 West County Road 82
Roseville, MN 55113
2, E 2002
January 17, 2002
LS::iTY _._.--._.----_._._--~:~:
Mr. Aaron Parrish
City of Arden Hills
1245 West Highway 96
Arden Hills, MN 55112-5794
Subject:
Gateway Business Center -- MnJDOT Review File # EA W02-001
Northeast Quadrant of Interstate 35W and Interstate 694
Arden Hills, Ramsey County
Control Section 6284
Dear Mr. Parrish:
e
Please be advised that the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnJDOT) has reviewed the above
referenced Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W), Please address the following issues before any
further development:
. As stated in the attached March 30, 2001 letter (MnJDOT Review POI-031), the 1-35W /1-694
interchange is scheduled to be reconstructed, along with the 1-694 expansion project, in December,
2007. This project is considering the removal of the loop in the northeast quadrant and replacing it
with fly overs, Although it is our intention to remain within MnJDOT right of way, there are no
defmitive limits of reconstruction for the interchange at this time. If you have any questions
regarding this information, please contact Nancy Daubenberger (651-582-1379) in Mn/DOT's Design
section.
. The Appendices listed in the EA W were not attached to the submitted document for review, For
verification of traffic operations as a result of the proposed development, please submit the
Sim5/Synchro Software results to Kevin Schwartz (651-582-1278) in MnJDOT's System Operations
section,
. The drainage issues affecting MnJDOT's right of way are unclear by the information provided in the
EA W, It appears that the ponds in the proposed project are outletting into MnlDOT's right of way, A
MnJDOT drainage permit will be required, The City or project developer will need to submit
before/after hydraulic computations for both 10 and 100 year rainfall events verifying that all existing
drainage patterns and systems affecting Mn/DOT right of way will be perpetuated, One foot of
freeboard is needed over the highwater elevation, Please direct questions concerning these issues to
Eric Kasa (651-634-2076) ofMnJDOT's Water Resources section, Questions regarding permit
applications should be directed to Keith VanWagner (651-582-1443) ofMnlDOT's Permits section,
e
Please address all future correspondence for development activity such as plats, site plans, environmental
reviews, and comprehensive plan amendments to:
An equal opportunity employer
Paul Czech, Principal Transportation Planner
Mn/DOT - Metro Division
Waters Edge
1500 West County Road B-2
Roseville, Minnesota 55113
MnlDOT document submittal guidelines require three (3) complete copies of plats and two (2) copies of
other review documents including site plans, Failure to provide three (3) copies of a plat and/or two (2)
copies of other review documents will make a submittal incomplete and delay MnlDOT's review and
response to development proposals. We appreciate your anticipated cooperation in providing the
necessary number of copies, as this will prevent us from having to delay and/or return incomplete
submittals,
Feel free to contact me at (651) 582-1378 if you should have any questions.
rk
Copy: David Claypool, Ramsey County
Dan Soler, Ramsey County
Peter Carlson, Chesapeake Companies
Mn/DOT Division File - C.S. 6284
Mn/DOT LGL - Arden Hills
2
e
e
e
e
tit
e
~111t
\~~)
........
Minnesota Department of Transportation
Metropolitan Division
Waters Edge
1500 West County Road 82
Roseville, MN 55113
--
March 30, 2001
, ":"t",_
/ '-',JC:; 'i,
If Lf, f..} () .- l
! ~!-\" ~ D 2002 !
LOiTY or i c".. I
~~~;c:N HII I c-,
-~
Ramsey County
Attn: David Claypool
50 West Kellogg Boulevard, Suite 910
St. Paul, Minnesota 55102
Dear David Claypool:
SUBJECT:
Northeast Corner Addition
Minnesota Department of Transportation Review #POI-031
NE Quad, ofI-35W & 1-694
Arden Hills, Ramsey County
C.S, 6285
The Minnesota Department of Transportation has reviewed the NE Corner Addition plat in compliance
with State Statute 505,03, subdivision 2, Plats, We apologize for the delay in responding, Please address
the following issues prior to final plat acceptance:
. The final plat should show a land tie and also any MnIDOT monuments located in the field. If you
have any questions regarding this documentation please contact Mark Beatty in our Surveys section at
(651) 779-5450. Please forward 2 copies of the revised final plat to me at the above Roseville
address,
Along with these plat issues the following issues will also need to be addressed:
. A MlliDOT drainage permit will likely be required for any development in this area, The drainage
permit must include hydraulic computations and drainage area maps showing existing and proposed
conditions along with addressing 10 and 100-year storm events, In addition, one foot of freeboard
over high water elevation is needed. Existing drainage patterns and rates of runoff affecting Mn/DOT
right of way must be perpetuated. The sites stormwater discharge rate must not increase. If you have
any questions regarding MnIDOT's drainage concerns please contact Eric Kasa in our Water
Resource Engineering section at (651) 634-2076. You may contact Keith VanWagner in our Pennits
section at (651) 582-1443 for the appropriate permit forms and guidelines.
. As a reminder, the 1-35W I 1-694 interchange will be reconstructed along with the 1-694 expansion
project which is scheduled to be let in December of 2007. At this time, we are looking at removal of
the loop in the NE Quadrant, and replacing it with "fly-overs", We hope to stay within our right of
way, but since a layout has not yet been developed, we cannot guarantee this at this time. Ify6u have
any questions regarding these projects please contact Nancy Daubenberger in our Preliminary Design
section at (651) 582-1308,
An equal opportunity employer
Ramsey County
March 30, 2001
Page 2
.
. The proposed Arden HiJls MWlicipal State Aid Route 106 is in this area, though it appears to be north
ofthis project. Also, Gateway Boulevard could be a possible future portion ofMSA
Route 106, Any work on a MSA Route must meet State Aid rules and standards, The City must
review any changes to its MWlicipal State Aid system so that they stay within system limitations,
Please go to http://www.revisor.1e~.state.mn.uslarule/8820/ for information regarding State Aid
Operations Rules Chapter 8820, If you have any additional questions regarding these State Aid rules
and policies please contact Jim Deeny at (651) 582-1389,
MnIDOT will need to review site plans for any development in this area, Please address all future
correspondence for development activity to:
Paul Czech
MnlDOT Metro Division - Waters Edge
1500 West COWlty Road B-2
Roseville, Minnesota 55113
MnIDOT document submittal guidelines require three (3) complete copies of plats and two (2) copies of
other review documents including site plans, Failure to provide three (3) copies of plat and/or (2) copies .
of other review documents will make a submittal incomplete and delay MnIDOT's review and response to
development proposals,
We appreciate your anticipated cooperation in providing the necessary number of copies, as this will
prevent us from having to delay and/or return incomplete submittals.
If you have any additional questions regarding this review please call me at (651) 582-1468.
Sincerely,
"
Sharon Anderson
Transportation Planner 1 Local Government Liaison
Cc: Dan Soler 1 Ramsey County Traffic Engineer
Jennifer Chaput I Arden HiJls City Planner
Mark Hanson I Sunde Land Surveying, LLC.
Blind copies sent via Group Wise:
Mark Beatty 1 Oakdale Surveys
Keith VanWagner 1 Permits
Nancy Dauhenberger 1 Preliminary Design
Jim Deeny I State Aid
Eric Kasa 1 Water Resource Engineering
e
Blind copies to be filed:
Division File I CS 6285
LGL File 1 Arden Hills
e
GA TEW A Y BUSINESS CENTER
ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
e
December 10, 2001
e
Prepared by Dahlgren, Shardlow, and Uban and the Chesapeake Companies
Gateway Business Center.,Arden Hills, MN
EAW
November 2001
Table of Contents
Page
List of Figures........ ...... ......,...... ................... ............. ....,... ....,... ..,.............. ...... ..,.......,........ ...... ......... ......,...... ii
List of Appendices" ,.... ...... ..,.... ...... ..,....... ,.. ..,... ,....... ....,.. ...... ....,.......... ..,........ ................... ..... .......... ,.......... iii
1, Project Title ..........,..........,...................,........,.......,....,................................,...................,......,........,.......... 1
2, Proposer..,."..........................................,...........................""......."..............,..,.........". ....",...................... 1
3. RGU........,.,...,..,..,...."...........,.....",......,...",...........,..",.................",....,..,"......................,."..............,....,.1
4. Reason for EAW Preparation ,..,....,............,....,......,........,..................,...................................,..,...............1
5. Project Location.............................................................,.,.."........,............,...............,.",........ ..........,......., 1
6, Description ,......,..,....".........,.,.......,.......,..."..".....,.,................,....",...,..,....................,.".........,.,' ......,....... 2
7. Project Magnitude Data............................,....,.................,...................................,................,.................... 6
8. Permits and Approvals Required ..........................,................................,..........,.......................,................6
9. Land Use .......... .,.... ........... .,. ..................... ..... .................,... ....' .,........... ......,...... ..... ..... .............,.. ............. 7
10. Cover Types .....................................................................,...."....,...........,..........................,.................. 11
11. Fish, Wildlife and Ecologically Sensitive Resources..,.................,...............................,..,....:.........,....... 11
12. Physical Impacts on Water Resources .....,..,..............,.................................................,.................,....,. 13
13. Water Use ......."..........,...."."......,..........."..,.,....".,.. ....,....,... .......".,..........,. ."".... ........ ......,........,..,..... 14
14, Waler-Related Land Use Management Districts.......,..........................................................................., 15
15. Water Surface Use ............................................................,..................,......,.........................................15
16. Erosion and Sedimentation .......,...........................,........,...........................................,.......................... 15
17. Water Quality: Surface Water Runoff ................................,..................................,................................ 15
18. Water Quality: Wastewater ..........,....,............,.....,...................,.......'...........................,......................... 18
19. Geologic Hazards and Soil Conditions .......................,..,............................,.................,........................ 18
20. Solid Wastes, Hazardous Wastes, Storage Tanks ..........,........................................................,....,....... 21
21. Traffic.....,.,..........................,.......,..............................,....,..........................,.................. ......................., 22
22. Vehicle-Related Air Emissions.........................................,............................,.........,.............................. 24
23. Stationary Source Air Emissions ...........................................,.....................,.........................................25
24. Dust, Odors and Noise Impacts....................................................................,..,.............,.......................26
25. Sensitive Resou rces............................................................".....................,.."".............,...................... 26
26. Visual Impacts ......................................... ....... ................. ....,. .,....".,........... ...., .,.....""......,.................... 27
27, Compatibil ity with Plans,..............,.......................................,..,.....,.."...............,.....",............,............... 27
28. Impact on Infrastructure and Public Services .................,.....,..,......,....................,.............,................... 28
29. Cumulative Impacts.... ........ ....... .......................................,..... ......... ................ ,.., ..................,............... 28
30. Other Potential Environmental Impacts ..................,..,..........,...........,.............,.................................,.... 29
31, Summary of Issues,..............................................,......,................................................................,........ 29
32Certification by RGU .,........ ..",.......".",.,.".",..,.".... """.,..".,.... ....... ... .,....,......... ......... ....... ..,... .,. .""... .... 31
Pagei
e
e
e
e
e
e
Gateway Business Center--Arden Hills, MN
17-1
1,
2.
C2.0
C1.0
3.
4,
5.
EAW
November 2001
List of Figures
(Appendix A)
Page
Typical Wet Detention Pond Performance,..................................................................................... 17
USGS Map with Project Location ..........,......,............,.............................................,..........,....,...... 32
County Map ........ ........ ,........."..,..... ......, .,.. .".." .,.. ..,...... ......, ...... ....... ....... ...,... ........ ....,. .,..... ........,. 33
Existing Conditions Plan Showing AU Significant Natural Features .......................,.....,..................34
Grading, Utility and Erosion Control Plan ..............,............................,.........................,..,.............. 35
Future Land Use Plan ........................................................,...............,.........,.................................36
Zoning Map ,..... ."..,. .,.."..,.."..".......... .,...,.,.......... .,..... ... .... ........ ......, .,..,......,..., .,.. .,. .,.. .,. ............... 37
Maximum Development Concept Plan ....,............,......................................................................... 38
Page Ii
Gateway Business Center--Arden Hills, MN
EAW
November 2001
Appendices
e
A, Figures
B. Letter from Sarah D. Hoffman, Environmental Review Coordinator/Ecologist, Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources, December 28, 2000 to Carissa Schively, Dahlgren, Shard low & Uban, regarding
known locations of rare features in the vicinity of the Gateway Business Center property.
C. Letter from Carole J. Nelson, State Programs Administrator, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency,
December 28, 2000 to Carissa Schively, Dahlgren, Shardlow & Uban, regarding environmentally
contaminated sites in the vicinity of the Galeway Business Center property.
D. Letter from Dennis Gimmestad, Government Programs and Compliance Officer, Minnesota Historical
Society, February 12, 2001 to Elizabeth Blodgett, Dahlgren, Shardlow & Uban, regarding historical and
archeological properties in the vicinity of the Gateway Business Center property.
E. JLM Environmental, Inc. Phase I Environmental Assessment, January 4, 2001 (excerpt).
F. American Engineering Testing, Inc. Phase II Environmental Assessment, May 3,2001, for Chesapeake
Companies (excerpt).
G. There is no Appendix G
H. American Engineering Testing, Inc. Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Exploration and Review, e
November 22, 2000, for Chesapeake Companies (excerpt).
I. Short, Elliott, Hendrickson, Inc, Wetland Delineation Report, December 1999.
J. Short, Elliot, Hendrickson, Inc. Turning Movement Volumes at Each Modeled Intersection and Level of
Service Grade for Existing Conditions and One Year Post-Buildout.
e
Page iii
Gateway Business Center - Arden Hills. MN
EAW
September 2001
tit Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W)
Note to Reviewers
Comments must be submitted to the RGU (see item 3) during the 30-day comment period following notice of the
EAW in the EQB Monitor. (Contact the RGU or the EQB to learn when the comment period ends,) Comments should
address the accuracy and completeness of the information, potential impacts that may warrant further investigation,
and the need for an EIS.
1. Project Title: Interstates 694/35W Gateway Business Center
2. Proposer: Chesapeake Companies
Contact person: Peter C. Carlson. President
Address: Chesapeake Companies
11100 Wayzata Blvd" Suite 766
Minnetonka, MN 55305
Phone: (952) 847-2444
Fax: (952) 595-8247
E-mail: pcarlson@chesapeake-co,eom
3. RGU: City of Arden Hills
Contact person: Aaron Parrish Address: City of Arden Hills
4363 West Round Lake Road
e Arden Hills, MN 55112-3923
Phone: (651) 633-5676
Fax: (651) 633-7839
E-mail: cityhall@ci,arden-hills,mn,us
4, Reason for EAW Preparation:
o EIS scoping
Ii:! Mandatory EAW
o Citizen petition
o RGU discretion
o Proposer volunteered
If the EAW or EIS is mandatory, give EQB rule category subpart number and subpart name:
4410.4300, subpart 14, Industrial, Commercial and Institutional Facilities
5. Project Location: Portion of the Southern Yz, Section 21, Township 30N - Range 23W
County: Ramsey
City: Arden Hills
e
Copies of each of the following are attached:
. USGS 7.5 minute, 1:24:000 scale map indicating the project boundaries (Figure 1)
. County map (Figure 2)
. Site plan showing all significant and natural features (Figure C2.0)
Page 1
Gatewav Business Center - Arden Hills. MN
EAW
September 2001
. Grading, Utility and Erosion Control Plan (Figure C 1,0)
. Land Use Guide Plan (Figure 3)
. Zoning Map (Figure 4)
. Maximum Development Scenario Concept Plan (Figure 5)
e
6. Description:
a) Project Summary. Provide a project summary of 50 words or less to be published in the fOB
Monitor.
The Gateway Business Center is a 26,5-acre commercial development proposed in the
City of Arden Hills, The proposed development includes buildings up to eight stories
in height, with underground parking and two double-level parking deeks. Landscaped
buffers will be ineorporated throughout the site.
b) Project Description. Give a complete description of the proposed project and related new
construction. Attach additional sheets as necessary. Emphasize construction, operation
methods and features that will cause physical manipulation of the environment or will produce
wastes. Include modifications to existing equipment or industrial processes and significant
demolition, removal or remodeling of existing structures. Indicate the timing and duration of
construction activities.
The project site is located in the northeast quadrant of the intersection of 1-694 a.
(southern boundary) and 1-35W (western boundary) in Arden Hills, Ramsey County, ,.,
MN, Gateway Boulevard forms the northern and most of the eastern boundary of the
site, Minnesota Transfer (MT Properties) railroad right-of-way runs along the south
side of Gateway Boulevard. A railroad bridge connects the western boundary of the
site with the property located on the west of I-35W, Thirteenth St. NE, a cul-de-sac
connected to Gateway Boulevard, runs east-west and stubs into the northwest portion
of the site.
Parcell, owned by Morris Communications, is located adjacent to the 1-694 freeway
and consists of 19,9 acres, Parcel 2 and an exception parcel, owned by ATS Steel, are
located adjacent to the existing railroad right-of-way and consist of 1.1 and 3.1 acres
respectively. Two connected A TS Steel buildings, a one-story and a two-story, are
located on the exception parcel. The railroad right-of-way, owned by MT
PropertieslBurlington Northern Railroad, parallels Gateway Boulevard and eonsists
of 2.4 acres.
The proposed Gateway Business Center presented in this EA W represents a
maximum development scenario consisting of office and supporting ancillary uses,
made mutually compatible through a combination of careful design and coordinated
public and private investment. The proposed development scenario may include
general, professional, and medical offices, medical clinics, financial institutions, and
typical accessory uses, Supporting aecessory uses, such as parking areas, signage, and
fitness centers, day care facilities, convenience retailing and food services, will e
Page 2
Gatewav Business Center - Arden Hills. MN
EAW
September 2001
e
primarily serve the office tenants, Additionally, any accessory or incidental assembly,
repair, processing, manufacturing, laboratory, or storage that is necessary to conduct
the permitted use will be allowed, as specified in the Planned Unit Development
(PUD) zoning ordinance, as long as it does not occupy more than 60 percent of the
gross floor area of any building, and provided that such use may not exceed a
maximum of 50 percent of the gross square footage of the entire development.
The proposed office development scenario will fall within a City-approved range of
225,000 to 495,000 square feet of gross floor area, The Concept Plan (Figure 5)
illustrates the proposed development with the maximum amount of square footage
and with the most intense land use (office), The ultimate size of the development and
type of commercial uses will be determined by market conditions and demand at the
time of development approval,
The construction of the 26,5 acre development will require four parcels to be
combined and replatted and 13th Street NE to be removed, The Morris
Communications pareel, 19,9 acres, includes two billboard outlots and a sightline
easement that will be replatted to facilitate development. Morris Communications
will retain ownership of the two billboard outlots, Two pareels of 1.1 and 3.1 acres
are owned by ATS Steel. If and when acquired by the Proposer, the existing
structures on these parcels will be razed. A final parcel of 2,4 acres consists of a
railroad right-of-way owned by MT Properties/Burlington Northern Railroad that will
be vacated upon acquisition by the Proposer. Construction timing will be dependent
on the type of building constructed, which could be either a single story or multi-story
building, up to eight-stories in height. It is assumed that length of construetion will
range between six and 18 months, Project phasing is unknown and will be driven by
market demand,
e
Site Layout.
The office development scenario will range in size from 225,0000 to 495,000 square
feet of gross floor area (Figure 5), At the less intense end of the range, the
development could accommodate single- or multi-story office buildings, One level of
tempered, or heated, parking could be provided under the buildings. At the more
intense end of the range, the development could accommodate mid-rise office
buildings up to eight-stories in height (not including penthouse structures or
mechanical or screening appurtenances), connected by a common entrance atrium,
elevator lobby and service core. Again, one level of tempered parking would be
provided under the office buildings.
e
Site Circulation and Parking.
Off-street parking for the office development scenario will be provided as a
combination of surface parking, parking underneath the office building and two-stOry
structure parking. As required by the City zoning for office uses, parking will be
provided at a ratio of five (5) 1Jarking spaces per one thousand (1,000) square feet of
gross floor area (GFA). defined as total GFAx 95 percent, which is tvpical of similar
office developments in the area. At a total GFA range of 225,000 to 495,000 square
feet, a range between 1,069 and 2,351 parking spaces will result. This amount of
parking represents a maximum development seenario, If the final development
Page 3
Gateway Business Center - Arden Hills. MN
EAW
September 2001
contains commercial uses other than or in addition to office, the required amount of .
parking, as regulated bv the Zoning Code, will be provided,
Vehicular access to the development would be provided by three to four driveway
connections to Gateway Boulevard, Two of the driveways would provide access to
the surface parking, underground parking and lower deck level. The internal layout of
the parking and driveways would provide for alternate circulation routes within the
site, Two of the driveways are aligned with the existing driveways of the light
industrial development to the north, Thirteenth Street NE will be removed,
Existing Development
The ATS Steel property is currently developed with a 45,000 square foot industrial
warehouse building, 34 parking spaees, a loading area and a stormwater pond. The
building is occupied and is the site of specialized metal fabricating for ATS Steel.
A portion of 3rd Avenue N" 13th Street NE and a stormwater pond are located in the
northwestern comer of the site. The Minnesota Transfer (MT Properties) railroad
right-of-way includes a spur line and siding to ATS Steel. This spur line crosses 1-
35W immediately south of Gateway Boulevard and is not currently used, Moms
Signs possesses two billboards located along the 1-694 frontage. An Exeel Energy
electric transmission line runs north-south along the western portion of the site, The .
remainder of the site is undeveloped.
Open SpacelW etlands.
The location of the wetland systems and poor soil conditions, in eombination with the
location of the existing power transmission lines, will require development to be
concentrated on the eentral portion of the site, Given these and other site constraints,
development on this project will result in a limited amount of wetland encroachment.
However, unavoidable wetland encroachment will be properly permitted and
mitigated in aecordance with the requirements and approvals of the appropriate State
and Federal agencies. The major portion of the existing wetland systems will be
preserved.
The wetland mitigation and storm water ponding requirements of the development
will be provided adjacent to the western wetland system. The mitigation and ponding,
in combination with the preserved wetlands, will result in a substantial amount of
open space, 10,65 acres, in both the western and southeastern portions of the site,
The development will provide islands within and between the surfaee parking areas,
Parking setbacks will vary between 10 and 40 feet in width along the 1-694 freeway,
and 10 and 50 feet along Gateway Boulevard. These islands and the perimeter open
space will provide adequate room for landscaping to buffer and enhanee the
development.
.
Page 4
e
e
.
Gatewav Business Center - Arden Hills. MN
September 2001
EAW
Trails
A pedestrian trail extension to Long Lake Regional Park, utilizing the eXlstmg
railroad bridge may be constructed, However, Mf Properties will require the Cities of
Arden Hills and New Brighton to take responsibility for the bridge, or have it
removed as part of the right-of-way vacation, requiring intergovernmental
cooperation between both Cities. Trails will potentially be located along wetland
edges,
The proposer will provide an easement for a City trail, and will cooperate with the
City during the approval phase of the development to determine the best trail
alignment and easement needs,
Easement and Right-of-Way Areas
The project includes three easement areas, The first, a sight line easement on the
Morris Communications parcel will be addressed in the replatting of the project site.
The second easement area, for an electric transmission line on the western part of the
site, will remain. Right-of-way currently owned by MT PropertieslBurlington
Northern Railroad is under negotiation for purchase, Additional utility and road
easements on the assembled site must be vacated to allow for development.
General Infrastructure Issues
Utilities are available for the development of this project. This project will require the
highest level of eommunication service and technology available, This project will
pursue access to the fiber optic lines planned for the area.
The development of the site will necessitate the improvement of the frontage road,
whieh will be undertaken by the City of Arden Hills and coordinated with the
project's construetion schedule and activities.
c) Project Purpose. Explain the project purpose; if the project will be carried out by a
governmental unit, explain the need for the project and identify its beneficiaries.
The purpose of the project is to construct a high-quality commercial development in a
strategic manner that takes advantage of market opportunities and is compatible with
the City's land use plan for the subject property. Development of the project will be
earried out by Chesapeake Companies or assigns, not a governmental unit.
d) Future Stages of Development. Are future stages of this development including development
of any outlots planned or likely to happen?
There are no future stages of development associated with this project.
If yes, briefly describe future stages, relationship to present project, timeline and plans for
environmental review.
e) Is this project a subsequent stage of an earlier project?
Page 5
Gatewav Business Center - Arden Hills. MN
EAW
September 2001
This project is not a subsequent stage of an earlier project.
If yes, briefly describe the past development, timeline and any past environmental review.
e
7.
Project Magnitude Data:
Total Project Acreage:
26.5 acres
Commercial Floor Area:
225,000 to 495,000 square feet gross floor area
Building Height
1 to 8 stories, as governed by City ordinance
Parking Spaces:
1,069 - 2,351 spaces,
Off-street parking shall be provided as a
combination of surface parking, parking underneath
the office building and structure parking. If the
development eonsists of offiee, the most intense
commercial land use, parking will be provided at a
ratio of five (5) parking spaces per one thousand
(1000) square feet of gross floor area (total GFA x
95%), Commercial uses other than office will
provide the number of parking spaces as required by
the City zoning eode.
e
8. Permits and Approvals Required: 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 direcl and indirect forms of public financial assistance including bond
guarantees, Tax Increment Financing and infrastructure.
MN Pollution Control Agency
TYPE OF APPLICATION
Environmental Determination
Concept, Final, and Master PUD Approval
Lot Consolidation Approval
Dri veway Entrance Permit
Grading Permit
Sewer Connection Permit
Water Connection Permit
Building Permits
Land Development Permit (Stormwater
Management Plan, Erosion Control Plan,
and Wetland Alteration Plan)
Sanitary Sewer Extension Permit
Stormwater Permit
e
UNIT OF GOVERNMENT
State of Minnesota
City of Arden Hills
Rice Creek Watershed District
Page 6
e
.
.
Gatewav Business Center - Arden Hills. MN
EAW
September 2001
MN Deparlment of Health
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
MN Department of Transportation
Watermain Extension Permit
Wetland Permit
Drainage Permit
Plat Map Review
Vacation of Railroad
Surface Transportation Board, USDOT
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 Land Use
According to the Phase I Environmental Assessment (EA), January 4, 2001, which did
not analyze the ATS Steel property, much of the site has served as cultivated agricultural
land and, later, pasture land, The site continues to serve as horse pasture land, An
underground sanitary sewer interceptor line was present on the site for many years before
it was relocated off site in 1998, A buried natural gas pipeline, which was abandoned in-
place in 1995, is present on the site,
The primary existing land use on the site includes the ATS Steel industrial facility. The
site also contains two billboard outlots and railroad right-of-way, owned by MT
Properties/Burlington Northern Railroad, Finally, an eleetric transmission line erosses the
western portion of the site running north-south and includes one of the towers suspending
the lines.
The A TS Steel property currently includes a one- and a two-story industrial building,
whieh are attached, parking and loading areas and a stormwater pond, A portion of 3rd
Avenue N" 13th Street NE and a stormwater pond are located in the northwestern corner
of the site, The Minnesota Transfer (MT Properties) railroad right-of-way includes a spur
line and siding to A TS Steel. This spur line crosses I-35W immediately south of Gateway
Boulevard and is not currently used, Morris Signs possesses two billboards located along
the 1-694 frontage,
Project Compatibility with Adjaeent and Nearby Land Uses
The projeet will be compatible with adjacent and nearby land uses. Adjacent land uses
include light industrial development to the north of the projeet site and vaeant land to the
east. These land uses are guided Industrial in the City's Comprehensive Plan, Round
Lake, which is surrounded by a corridor of natural open space, is located to the northeast
and serves as a buffer for the residential development located on the east and northeast
sides of the lake. Highways 96 and 10, and Interstates 35W and 694 surround these uses
on all sides,
According to the City of Arden Hills Zoning Ordinance and the associated Zoning Map,
this site is designated as Gateway Business, This district was specifically established to
provide a flexible framework for the development of the northeast quadrant of the 1-694
Page 7
Gateway Business Center - Arden Hills. MN
September 2001
EAW
and 1-35W interchanges, The Gateway Business district allows for flexibility and a mix of
business, multi-family residential, and office development. The City requires that the .
mix, relationship and intensity of uses and huildings be compatible and complementary
with uses in the district and adjacent uses.
Potential Conflicts Involving Environmental Matters
According to the Phase I Environmental Assessment (EA), January 4, 2001, a rendering
plant was located just north of the site for many years, The City of Arden Hills took
control of this property around 1990 and a limited environmental investigation was
completed to assess potential impacts from the plant. No significant soil or groundwater
impacts were identified at the plant that would be expected to impact the site, An
abandoned railroad spur line that served the rendering plant remains adjaeent to portions
of the northern houndary of the site,
Three or four large circular structures were located adjacent to the north of the site in the
1950's, at the current location of the ATS Steel building. The use of these structures is
unknown, but they eould have been storage tanks, holding pens or impoundments
associated with the rendering plant. No information about these structures was found.
The ATS Steel building is currently used for warehousing and steel manufacturing,
Hazardous wastes generated at the facility over the past ten years include waste paint,
used oil and filters and degreasing solvents, According to the Phase I Environmental
Assessment, review of the Ramsey County hazardous waste inspeetion file for the ATS
site identified no hazardous waste storage or disposal problems or violations. Based on
the past presence of the circular structures and history of hazardous waste generation at
the A TS Steel facility, a potential for soil or groundwater contamination exists, especially
since the property is adjacent to and located at an upgradient location. Buried items were
reportedly eneountered on the site during redevelopment of the ATS property, No
information about these items was available.
Two groundwater monitoring wells are present on the northwest portion of the site, These
wells are part of a large groundwater monitoring network associated with the former
Twin Cities Army Ammunition Plan (TCAAP), located approximately three-quarters of a
mile to the northeast of the site. The wells were completed in two separate aquifers.
Review of analytical data related to collected water samples indicates groundwater on the
western edge of the site was impacted with volatile organic compounds (VOCs),
However, contamination has not been detected in these wells for several years. A
groundwater pump and treatment system continues to operate at the TCAAP facility to
remediate eontaminated groundwater, and contains the contamination plumes that extend
beyond the borders of the TCAAP facility,
Debris and other items found on the ground surface during a site visit included discarded
metal piping and other metal equipment, brush, furniture, wood pallets, a small
abandoned camping trailer, a wooden feed dispenser, plastic water and feed containers
and discarded canvas signs, A small quantity of insulated wallboard with a tarpaper layer
Page 8
e
.
e
.
.
Gatewav Business Center - Arden Hills. MN
EAW
September 2001
was observed on the ground in the northwest comer of the site, The tarpaper layer may
contain asbestos,
Based on review of the regulatory database information, several facilities in the site area
have been the souree of soil and/or groundwater contamination, Based on their distance
and/or location with respect to assumed groundwater flow direction, impacts at the site
from these documented releases, if any, are not expected to exceed regulated levels,
Review of a 1989 Phase I EA for the rendering plant property reported an old dump on
the western portion of the site. However, current information from the MPCA identifies
this dump to be located three-quarters of a mile north/northwest of the site on the
opposite side of the freeway. Aerial photographs dating back to 1937 show no evidence
of dumping activities on the site,
Based on research eonducted for the Phase I EA, no recognized environmental conditions
were identified on the site with the exception of the following:
. Buried items may have been encountered during development of the ATS Steel
building located adjacent to the north of the site. Large circular structures possibly
associated with the former rendering plant were present in the 1950's at this location,
Hazardous wastes have been generated at the facility for at least the past ten years.
Based on the historical uses of the ATS Steel property, a potential for subsurface
contamination exists at the site.
. A geotechnical soil boring completed at the site identified fill that contained cinders,
The source of the fill is unknown and could represent a potential source of
contamination,
The Phase I EA recommends the following:
. A subsurface investigation should be carried out if it is necessary to verify whether or
not historical uses of the ATS Steel property have impacted subsurface conditions at
the site,
. A chemical analysis should be conducted if it is neeessary to verify whether or not the
fill material containing einders possesses elevated eoneentrations of metals or other
possible contaminants, A Phase II EA was conducted in May (see below),
. Site development plans should take into account the presence of the two groundwater
monitoring wells that may be required to remain in place for several years,
. The insulated wallboard should be tested to determine if the tarpaper layer contains
asbestos, If asbestos is found, this material should be properly disposed of at a facility
licensed to accept asbestos waste,
A Phase II Limited Soil/Groundwater Assessment was completed May 3, 2001 for the
site, excluding the A TS Steel property, According to this report, a limited Phase II, dated
April 9, 2001, involved the excavation of six test pits on the property, ranging from 7 to
17 feet below grade, These test pits were explored for possible buried materials and to
collect samples for chemieal analysis, Diesel range organics were found in the soil and
groundwater and may consist of polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons. Additional sampling
and chemical analysis of the fill material, underlying soils and groundwater was
Page 9
Gatewav Business Center - Arden Hills, MN
EAW
September 2001
recommended to verify if polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons are present III the
subsurface of the property. .
During the Phase II EA, completed in May 2001, no eoncentrations of organic vapors
were detected in the soil samples, except for a very low detection of 1.5 ppm in the 2-4
foot soil sample, Diese] range organics at a concentration of 320 parts per billion was
found in a groundwater sample, No polynuelear aromatic hydrocarbons were deteeted in
the groundwater samples, The results of the analysis revealed the following:
. Low concentrations of diesel range organics and polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons
contaminated soil exists within the fill soils and was noted within the surficial
groundwater,
. Since diesel range organics were noted by the laboratory as atypical of petroleum
products, it is likely their coneentrations are due to the existenee of polynuclear
aromatic hydrocarbons eontaminants,
. The polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons concentrations noted within the fill soils are
considered low and are below MPCA established Tier 2 (industrial) Soil Reference
Values,
. Since polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons concentrations were not detected within the
groundwater of all three test borings, the polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons noted in
the fill soils do not appear to be leaching,
According to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) (see Appendix C) no
environmentally contaminated sites, such as hazardous waste generators or
under/aboveground storage tank installations, leaking under/aboveground storage tanks .
or spills of hazardous substances and or petroleum products have occurred or exist within
the project boundaries,
Inactive leaking underground storage tank (LUST) sites on or near the project site, within
approximately one-eighth mile and not separated by a freeway (see Figure I in Appendix
C),:
. Minneapolis Hide & Tallow (2540) 6]9 14th St. NE closed 4/1/1991
. The Menge]koch Co. (5655) 119 14th St. NE closed 8120/1993
V o]untary Investigation Clean-up Site (VIC) on or near the project site, within one half
mile and not separated from site by a freeway (see Figure 2 in Appendix C):
. Butcher's Allotment (4551), presumably the current site of ATS Steel. No
information was provided about this site in the 2001 Phase I EA.
. Round Lake Business Center (4325), 4354-4396 Round Lake Road West, Arden Hills
MPCA staff provide technical review of the investigation and any necessary remedial
activities for Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup (VIC) sites, A number of these
properties have been cleaned up or do not require any cleanup work, according to the
MPCA. More detailed analysis about these sites and others located within the vicinity of
the site are discussed in the 2001 Phase I EA, a full copy of which is available for review
upon request. Excerpts of the Phase I and II EAs are located in Appendices E and F
respectively, .
Page 10
e
e
e
Gatewav Business Center - Arden Hills. MN
EAW
September 2001
10.
A Phase I Environmental Assessment will be conducted prior to demolition of the
existing ATS Steel buildings,
Cover Types. Estimate the acreage of the site with each of the following cover types before and
after development:
Existinl! Site
Upland Areas
Crop Land
Wooded/forest
Impervious Surfaces
Brush/Grassland
Urban/Suburban Landscaping
Wetland Areas (types 1-8)
Other (stormwater pond)
After
Before
o
3.02:1:
2.9:t
15,O:t
O,87:t
3.96
0.70
26.45
o
0,30:1:
14.5:t
5,23:t
l.0:t
4.46
0,96
26.45
If Before and After total are not equal, explain why:
Not applicable.
11.
Fish, Wildlife, and Ecologically Sensitive Resources.
a. Fish & Wildlife Resources. 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.
The site is bounded by highways on all sides. As a result, the existing wetlands would
be restrieted to habitat for aquatic species and birds, Most of the existing wetlands
will be preserved. Unavoidable wetland encroachment will result in a 2: 1
replacement. Therefore, it is assumed that the existing habitat will remain unaffected
for the most part,
According to the 2001 EA, vegetation on the site was varied and included low-
growing ground cover, typical wetland plants, shrubs and trees, According to the
Wetland Delineation Report, Appendix I, wetlands #3, #5 and #7, which will be
affected, possess the following types of dominant vegetation:
Page 11
Gateway Business Center - Arden Hills. MN
EAW
Septem be r 2001
Wetland Veoetation Unland WateT Vel!etation
Wetland #3 Horseweed Least Spikerush
(Eril!eron canadensis) (EJeocharis acicularis)
Kentucky Bluegrass Narrow-leaf Cattail
(Poa pratensis) (Typha angllstifolia)
Reed Canary Grass
(Phalaris arundinacea)
Wetland #5 Kentucky Bluegrass Reed Canary Grass
(Poa oratensis) (Phalaris arundinacea)
Sedge (Carex spp)
Wetland #7 Kentucky Bluegrass Narrow~lcaf Cattail
(Paa pratensis) (Tvnha angllstifolia)
Lesser Duckweek
(Lemoa minor)
Swamp Smartweed
(polygonum
hvdropiperoides)
b. Endangered Species. Are any state-listed (endangered, threatened, or special concern)
species, rare plant communities or other sensitive ecological resources such as native prairie
habitat, colonial nesting bird colonies or regionally rare plant communities on or near the site?
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: Describe measures to minimize or avoid adverse impacts.
According to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Blanding's Turtles, a
state-threatened species, which is defined as a species that is likely to become
endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its
range within the State of Minnesota, have been reported in the area and may be found
on the projeet site if habitat is suitable, However, the existing development (roads and
buildings) between known Blanding's turtle habitat and the project site probably has
resulted in the site being inaceessible to the Blanding's turtle population, Moreover,
the site in its current state is dry and may not be conducive as habitat. The proposed
project will potentially provide habitat, in the form of wetlands and stormwater
ponding, for the Blanding's turtle,
As suggested by the DNR, the following steps are recommended to protect any
Blanding's turtles on site as much as possible. If the presence of Blanding's turtles is
verified on the site, the proposer will follow as many of these recommendations as is
feasible,
. Signs will be posted during on-site construction alerting workers to the potential
presence of the turtles. In addition, workers will be informed verbally about the
presence of Blanding's turtles and instructed to move them to the nearest wetland
if they are encountered,
. When working near wetlands, silt fencing will be installed to keep turtles out of
construction areas, These fences will be removed immediately after the area has
been revegetated,
Page 12
e
e
.
e
e
.
Gatewav Business Center - Arden Hills. MN
EAW
September 2001
. Ditches will not be mowed between June 1st and October 1 st
. Vegetation management under power lines will be done mechanically between
October I st and June I st without the use of chemicals,
. Below-ground utility construction sites will be returned to original grade, Erosion
will be prevented from reaching wetlands and lakes,
. Graded areas will be revegetated with native vegetation, Use of fertilizers and
pesticides will be avoided,
. All wetlands will be protected from road run-off, lawn and other chemical run-off
by a naturally-vegetated buffer strip,
. Shallow, vegetated wetlands (Types 2 and 3) will not be dredged and deepened.
. Landscaping will be left as natural as possible.
. Road placement will avoid separating wetlands from adjacent uplands and will
avoid bisecting wetlands,
. Roads will be kept to minimal standards on widths and lanes,
. If roads are not ditched, as recommended by the DNR, four-inch curbs possessing
a 3: 1 slope will be constructed,
DNR Natural Heritage and Nongame Reference correspondence number: ERDB 20010542
12.
Physical Impacts on Water Resources
Will the project involve the physical or hydrological alteration (dredging, filling, stream diversion,
outfall structure, diking, and impoundment) of any surface waters such as a lake, pond, wetland,
stream or drainage ditch? 0 Yes 0 No
If yes, identify water resource affected and give the DNR Protected Waters Inventory number(s) if
the water resources affected are on the PWI:
The existing site includes five wetlands, totaling approximately 4 acres, all of which have
been delineated, and two stormwater ponds, totaling approximately 0,7 acres in size" The
westernmost wetland is a PEMC Type 2 Wet Meadow, The central and larger
southeastern wetlands are PEMC Type 2/3 Wet Meadow and PEMCd Type 2/3 Wet
Meadow respectively, A narrow PEMC Type 3 Shallow Marsh is located along the
southeastern part of the freeway and a PEMC Type 3 Shallow Marsh is located southeast
of the Gateway Boulevard cul-de-sac, For more information, see the attached Wetland
Delineation Report, Appendix I.
According to the 2001 EA, the stormwater retention basin, loeated on the northwest
portion of the site between 13th Street and the railroad tracks, receives stormwater from
Round Lake Road, Gateway Boulevard and the associated road easement areas to the
north of the site, A limited amount of stormwater from paved parking areas also drains
into the site, The City of Arden Hills maintains the pond and possesses an easement for
the pond with the site owner.
Wetland mitigation and storm water ponding requirements will be provided adjacent to
the western wetland system, Surface water runoff from the proposed development will be
Page 13
Gatewav Business Center - Arden Hills. MN
EAW
September 2001
directed into the stormwater ponds, where the water will be pretreated prior to being .
discharged into the wetlands,
Describe alternatives considered and proposed mitigation measures to minimize impacts.
The wetland systems subdivide the site into smaller areas that cannot be developed to
meet market needs and development standards, Given the loeation of the wetlands, poor
soils and the existence of the power transmission lines, the proposed development will
require a limited amount of wetland encroachment. Unavoidable wetland encroachment
will be properly permitted and mitigated and the major portion of the existing wetland
systems will remain intact. Affected water resources include Wetland #3, PEMC, Type
2/3, Wet Meadow, 0,71 aeres; Wetland #5 PEMB-CIPEMCd, Type 2/3, wet meadow,
0,38 acres; Stormwater management pond, 0,53 acres, The wetland mitigation,
stormwater ponding and preserved wetlands will result in significant open spaee in both
the western and southeastern portions of the site.
Proposed mitigation measures are 2: 1 replacement of impaeted wetland, including on-site
ponding. The area of impacted wetland totals 1.09 acres, The replacement required by
the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) is two times the impaeted wetland. The
replacement will consist in part of the proposed stormwater treatment basin and the
proposed newly created wetland (see attached Grading, Utility and Erosion Control Plan, ..
Figure C1.0). The total square footage of replacement proposed is in excess of the ,.,
replacement required per the WCA rules. The proposed newly ereated wetland will have
characteristics of existing Wetland #3 (see attached Wetland Delineation Report,
Appendix I, and Existing Conditions Plan, Figure C2,O), Wetland #3 is a PEMC Type 2
Wet Meadow with dominant plant species including Spikerush and Cattail. The proposed
new wetland will vary from 1 foot to 6 feet in depth and will be approximately 1.62 acres
in area.
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)?
0Yes 0 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.
The proposed office buildings will be connected to the City's existing 12" watermain
along Gateway Blvd for fire protection and domestic water service. (See Grading, Utility,
e
Page 14
.
e
e
Gatewav Business Center - Arden Hills. MN
EAW
September 2001
and Erosion Control Plan, Figure Cl.O). It IS assumed the City's water capacity IS
adequate to serve this type of development.
According to the Phase I EA, a well is located at the ATS Steel property, which was
installed in 1978 to a depth of 117 feet and is still active for industrial purposes, The well
owner is Minnesota Diversified. This well will be properly closed upon redevelopment of
the site.
Two groundwater monitoring wells are located on the northwest eorner of the site. The
Minnesota Unique Well Numbers are 434035 and 434038. These wells will not be
affected by the development.
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? D Yes iii No
If yes, identify the district and discuss project compatibility with district land use restrictions.
Not applicable.
15.
Water Surface Use. Will the project change the number of type of watercraft on any water body?
The proposed project will have no impact on the number or type of watercraft on any water body,
DYes IiINo
If yes, indicate the current and projected watercraft usage and discuss any potential overcrowding
or conflicts with other uses.
Not applicable.
16. Erosion and Sedimentation. Give the acreage to be graded or excavated and the cubic yards of
soil to be moved in acres and cubic yards.
:t20 acres = :t78,770 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.
No steep slopes or highly erodible soils exist on the site,
Proposed slopes will not exceed 3:1 (horizontal to vertical), Retaining walls will be used
in some areas to maintain slopes 3: 1 or flatter and to avoid wetland impact. Best
Management Practices (BMPs) will be used for control of erosion and sedimentation.
Erosion control measures will include silt fence, rock construction entrances, and silt sack
inlet filters (See Grading, Utility and Erosion Control Plan, Figure Cl.O), BMPs will be
installed prior to initial grading and maintained throughout the construction process.
17.
Water Quality - Surface Water Runoff
Page 15
Gateway Business Center - Arden Hills, MN
EAW
September 2001
a. Compare the quantity and quality of site runoff before and after the project. Describe e
permanent controls to manage or treat runoff. Describe any stormwater pollution prevention
plans.
An existing regional stormwater management pond is located in the northwest comer
of the site. The pond was originally designed and built for the Gateway Business
Center development across Gateway Boulevard to the north of the proposed
development site. This pond will be expanded and surfaee water runoff from the
proposed development will be piped to the pond, The pond will provide measures for
rate control and water quality treatment. The existing regional stormwater pond was
designed to provide 2.95 ae-ft of permanent pool volume for the runoff from the
properties to the north, The permanent pool volume of the proposed pond is designed
to incorporate the permanent pool volume in the existing pond plus the EPA
Nationwide Urban Runoff Program (NURP) requirements of the proposed
Chesapeake development. The NURP requirements are calculated using a pervious
portion curve number of 61 and a design storm of 2.5," The existing stormwater pond,
on Pareel 2 was designed for the treatment of stormwater runoff for the existing site.
The proposed stormwater management pond will provide treatment for the runoff of
the proposed site; therefore, there will no longer be a need for the existing pond on
Parcel 2 and it will be filled.
Total required NURP permanent pool volume
Permanent pool volume of existing pond
Total permanent pool volume required
= 3,2149 ac-ft
= 2.95 ac-ft
= 6.1649 ac-ft
e
Total permanent pool volume provided in the proposed regional stormwater pond
=6.1685 ae-ft (proposed) > 6.1649 ac-ft (required); OK.
This proposed pond is designed to control post-development peak discharge rates to
the pre-development discharge rates of the same events, The overflow elevation of
the proposed pond is 890,50,
24-hr Storm Event
100-yr
Before (cfs)
89
After (cfs)
42
toO-V' HWL -Pond Wetland
889.81 884,61
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 of runoff on the
quality of receiving waters.
The site drains to the regional storm water pond on site, This pond diseharges into the
adjacent wetland and eventually drains into Rice Creek. The proposed pond is
designed with the criteria derived from the EPA's Nationwide Urban Runoff Program
(NURP) , Based upon NURP and other monitoring studies, ponds designed according
to these guidelines should have pollutant removal efficiencies similar to those shown
in the figure below, These calculations focus on sizing and shaping the permanent
pool, which is necessary for water quality control purposes.
.
Page 16
.
.
.
Gatewav Business Center - Arden Hills. MN
SUSPENDED SOLIDS
OXYGEN DEMAND
TOTAL PHOSPHOIWS
DISSOLVED PHOSPHORUS
NITRATE NITROGEN
KJELDAHL NITROGEN
GO PPER
LEAD
ZING
EAW
Figure 17-1
TYPICAL WET DETENTION POND PERFORMANCE
o
"
-'" .. ~ ~ ~.
20
40
60
8D
PERCENT REMOVAL
William W. Walker, 1987, Design Calculations for Wet Detention Ponds,
Page 17
September 2001
1DO
Gatewav Business Center - Arden Hills. MN
EAW
September 2001
18.
Water Quality- Wastewaters
.
a, Describe sources, composition and quantities of all sanitary, municipal and industrial
wastewater produced or treated on the site.
495,OOOWastewater will be piped to the municipal sewer system, which should have
capacity for this type of development. Wastewater is not treated on the site,
The estimated flow increase is a maximum :t56.513 gallons per dav (gpd). This flow
is based on 2,400 sq, ft. of office space per one sewer availability charge (SAC) unit.
One SAC unit equals 274 gpd. 495,000 sf is equivalent to 206 SAC units, which are
equivalent to 56,513 gpd.
The maximum estimated BODs increase is :t94,3 lb/dav. This ealculation is based on
medium concentration wastewater (BODs = 200 mg/I) applied to the 56,513 gpd flow
increase,
[BODs = 56,513gpd*3,7851/gal*200mg/I*(llb/453,6x103mg)],
b. Describe waste treatment methods or pollution prevention efforts and give estimates of
composilion 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.
Wastewater will not be treated on site,
.
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.
Wastes will be discharged into the Metropolitan Wastewater Treatment Plant in St.
Paul, Minnesota. No pretreatment provisions will be provided,
Aeeording to the DNR, wastewater flows above 1,000,000 gallons constitute an area
of concern, Flows from this development fall well below this amount and thus it is
assumed capacity is available for this type of development,
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.
Not applicable.
19.
Geologic Hazards and Soil Conditions.
a. Approximate depth (in feet) to ground water: 6,9-11.5 feet below grade at three of twelve
boring locations
Minimum: 6,9
Average: 9,2
.
Page 18
Gatewav Business Center - Arden Hills, MN
EAW
September 2001
.
Approximate depth (in feel) to bedrock: Boring depths ncver reached bedrock, 200 feet,
according to the Ramsey County Geological Atlas
Minimum:
Average: 200
A preliminary Geoteehnical Exploration and Review, November 22, 2000, a Phase I
Environmental Assessment, January 4, 2001, and a Phase IT Environmental
Assessment, May 3, 2001 (all available upon request) were prepared for the site, See
appendices for excerpts from these reports. The Phase I and IT EAs did not investigate
conditions on the A TS Steel property. According to the soil boring report,
groundwater levels are not easy to determine, due to the relatively slow-draining
silty/clayey soils, which can cause perched water to develop, Piezometers and long-
term monitoring are necessary to better determine groundwater levels,
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,
.
The Phase I Environmental Assessment states that, according to the Ramsey County
Geologieal Atlas, the uppermost bedrock formation at the site consists of the Prairie
du Chien Group. The upper part of the Prairie du Chien Group is thin-bedded, sandy
or oolithic dolostone that may contain karst solution cavities, The lower part of the
Prairie du Chien Group is massive or thick-bedded dolostone.
.
The Preliminary Geotechnical Exploration and Review, November 22, 2000
(Appendix H), provided the following recommendations for the proposed
development:
. The proposed offiee buildings can be supported on spread footing foundations
designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 3,000 psf to 4,000 psf after soil
correcti on.
. The soil correction should inelude removing the surficial fill, topsoil, swamp
deposits and softer (N ~ 5 bpf) clayey soils,
. The floor slab ean be supported on grade after performing soil correction,
. Alternatively, the proposed five-story office building ean be supported on a pile
foundation, if foundations designed for a 4,000 psf bearing pressure are not
practical.
. Perimeter drain tile should be installed around below-grade building space.
. Pavements can be supported on the non-organic site soils after surface
compaction and placement of compacted fill to attain plan grade. Soils which
become unstable during the surface compaction should be subcut and replaced
with better quality material to attain grade.
. Placement of a I-foot-thiek sand layer in the upper portion of the sub grade ean
improve pavement performance, The pavement should be designed for an R-value
of 10 if the site soils are utilized for subgrade. If a I-foot-thick sand layer is
placed in the upper portion of the subgrade, the pavement can be designed for an
R-value of 20,
Page 19
Gateway Business Center - Arden Hills. MN
EAW
September 2001
. On-site soils are relatively poor draining and, thus, surface water can be expected
to perch in the excavation during times of wetter weather. Water should be .
removed from within the excavations during construction, Based on the soils
encountered, the ground water can be handled with conventional sump pumping.
. On-site soils can become disturbed under construction traffic, especially if the
soils are wet. If the soils become disturbed, they should be subcut to the
underlying undisturbed soils, The subcut can then be dried and recompacted back
into place, or they should be removed and replaced with drier imported fill.
b. Describe the soils on the site, giving NRGS (SGS) 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 on the site and their NRCS classifications are as follows, aeeording to the
RamseylWashington County Soil Survey:
860C Urban Land-Hayden-KingsIey Complex, 3-15% slope. Urban land consists
of 90 percent of this complex and in undisturbed areas, the remainder consists of
Hayden and Kingsley soils, The soil is well-drained, permeability is moderate and
runoff is rapid, This complex is well-suited to building site development. Erosion
control is desirable both during and immediately following construction. Onsite
investigation is reeommended to determine the potentials and limitations of this
complex for any proposed use,
132B Hayden Fine Sandy Loam, 2-
6% slope. The soil is well-drained,
permeability is moderate and surface
runoff is slow. Good potential for
building sites.
.
132C Hayden Fine Sandy Loam, 6-
12% slope. The soil is well-drained,
permeability is moderate and surface
runoff is rapid, Well-suited as a
building site,
132D Hayden Fine Sandy Loam, 12-25% slopes. The soil is well-drained,
permeability is moderate and surfaee runoff is rapid to very rapid. Fair potential for
building sites. Erosion should be controlled both during and immediately following
construeti on.
The soil boring report states that the generalized soil profile consists of 1-14 feet of
fill, topsoil and swamp deposits underlain by glaeial till and alluvial soils. The fill
soils consist primarily of sand and silty sand, but some clayey soils are present. The
topsoil consists primarily of silty sand with lesser amounts of lean clay and clayey
sand. The topsoil thickness is typieally 1-2 feet. Swamp deposits were encountered at .
Page 20
e
e
e
Gatewav Business Center - Arden Hills. MN
EAW
September 2001
20.
a depth of 12.5-14 feet below grade at one of the borings, The swamp deposits at this
location appear to have been in a lower elevation area which was filled during
previous development of the property, The swamp deposits are very soft, based on N-
values,
Glacial till soils are the predominant soils at this site, The upper portion of the till is
weathered at some boring locations, The till consists of sandy lean clay, clayey sand
and silty sand. The clayey glaeial till soils are typically soft to stiff, based on N-
values, and the silty sand glacial till is medium dense to very dense. The glacial till
soils contain gravel. Some of the glacial till soils also include cobbles and boulders.
Alluvial soils are present at the transition between the topsoil and glacial till and
layers of coarse alluvium also exist within the glacial till. The coarse alluvial soils
consist of sand with silt and silty sand, Based on N-values, the coarse alluvial soils
vary from loose to very dense. The coarse alluvial soils contain varying amounts of
gravel. Cobbles and boulders can also be present within coarse alluvial soils,
Some fine alluvium and mixed alluvium are also present within the soil profile, The
fine alluvial soils consist of lean clay and the mixed alluvial soils consist of silty sand
and clayey sand,
According to the Phase I Environmental Assessment, one of the twelve geoteehnical
soil borings eontained 12 feet of fill comprised of sand and cinders, The source of the
cinders is unknown and represents a potential source of contamination, According to
the Soil Boring Report, it is unlikely that these materials were placed and compacted
in a controlled manner. A Phase II EA was completed in May 2001. See Section 9,
Potential Conflicts Involving Environmental Matters, for a more detailed discussion.
Proposed slopes will not exceed 3:1 (horizontal to vertical ), Retaining walls will be
used in some areas to maintain slopes 3: I or flatter and to avoid wetland impact. Best
Management Practices will be used for control of erosion and sedimentation, Erosion
control measures will include silt fence, rock construction entrances and silt sack inlet
filters,
Solid wastes; Hazardous Wastes; Storage Tanks
a. Describe types, amounts and compositions of soiid or hazardous wastes, including solid and
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.
All existing buildings on the site will be razed and hauled to a lieensed demolition
landfill. Hazardous materials, if any, will be removed by licensed professionals and
disposed of as required by law. A Phase I Environmental Assessment will be
conducted on the existing ATS Steel buildings prior to acquisition, The demolition
Page 21
Gatewav Business Center - Arden Hills. MN
EAW
September 2001
and removal of the buildings will be conducted in accordance with environmental
regulations, e
Municipal solid waste will be generated on-site and will be hauled to licensed landfill
sites, The development will follow the guidelines for solid waste and recycling as
required by the City of Arden Hills and Ramsey County. Hazardous waste produeed,
if any, will be disposed of as required by law,
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 use of toxic or hazardous materials is not anticipated to be associated with this
development.
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.
No above or below ground tanks storing petroleum products or other materials are
anticipated to be associated with this development.
21.
Traffic. 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.
e
Number of parking spaces proposed:
Parking Spaces:
1,069 - 2,351 spaces,
Off-street parking will be provided as a
combination of surface parking. parking underneath
the office building and structure parking. Parking
will be provided at a ratio of five (5) parking spaces
per one thousand (1,000) square feet of gross floor
area (total GFAx 95%),
Existing parking spaces (if project involves expansion):
The existing parking spaces will be removed,
Estimated maximum peak hour traffic generated (if known) and time of occurrence:
Note that only the upper range of the proposed development has been analyzed to
reflect worst-case traffie impacts, For the upper range of development. 750 vehicle
trips will be generated during each of the a.m. and p,m, peak hours,
e
Estimate of impact on traffic congestion on affected roads:
Page 22
.
e
.
Gatewav Business Center - Arden Hills. MN
EAW
September 2001
At the larger end of the project (495,000 square feet GFA), the development is
anticipated to generate 5,500 vehicle trips per day, Each peak hour was analyzed by
distributing traffic to inbound and outbound volumes from the development and then
to the roadway system, In distributing traffic, the area population eoncentration and
peak hour operational characteristics of the adjacent roadway system were utilized.
This distribution was compared to past studies and was consistent. The CSAH 96
intersections at Round Lake Road, and each of the I-35W ramps were modeled in the
p,m, peak hour using Synchro, a software package which simulates traffic flow and
calculates capacity and level of service (LOS), to estimate the effect this parcel has on
level of service,
In the a,m, peak hour, the larger range of the development will generate
approximately 230 westbound left turns from County Road 96 to Round Lake Road,
The development will also generate approximately 440 eastbound right tums, Major
impacts on adjacent intersections are 154 southbound left turns from I-35W to County
Road 96 and 285 northbound right turns from the northbound I-35W off ramp. The
third major approach volume consists of 165 additional northbound left turns from
Highway 10 to westbound County Road 96,
In the p.m. peak hour, it is anticipated that the parcel will generate 637 outbound
trips, Of these trips, 414 will turn left toward I-35W and 269 of those turning left to
go south on I-35W. The remaining 223 outbound trips will make right turns from
Round Lake Road onto County Road 96. The traffic generated by the projeet is not
anticipated to signifieantly affect the level of service at any of the modeled
intersections, The level of service one year after buildout (2003), both with and
without improvements to County Road 96, is anticipated to be no less than B, which
exceeds the design level of service of D.
Appendix J shows turning movement volumes at each of the modeled intersections,
and includes a level of serviee grade for both the existing conditions and those one
year after buildout.
Describe any traffic improvements necessary:
Ramsey County has planned improvements to County Road 96 between Old Highway
8 and Highway 10. These improvements include the widening of County Road 96 to
provide two through lanes and separate designated turn lanes in each direction, The
intersection at Highway 10 may be replaced with an interchange. A north leg will he
added to the interseetion of Round Lake Road and County Road 96, In addition,
pavement marking on Round Lake Road's northbound approach to County Road 96
will be modified to provide dual left turns, one through lane, and a right turn lane. No
additional improvements will be necessary.
Page 23
Gateway Business Center - Arden Hills. MN
EAW
September 2001
If the project is within lhe Twin Cities metropolitan area, discuss its impact on the regional _
transportation system: ..
Impacts to the regional transportation system (I-35W and Highway 10) will be
negligible in the year after buildout (2003), as indicated by the satisfactory level of
service along County Road 96.
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 aboul whether a detailed air quality analysis is needed.
Project Impact
Carbon monoxide (CO) levels are elevated near roadway intersections due to the
emission of this pollutant from the vehicles idling and passing by, The State of Minnesota
has ambient CO standards that are designed to protect human health and the environment.
The Standards are:
. I-hour average: 30 parts per million (ppm); and
. 8-hour average: 9 ppm,
Concentrations near or above these levels are most likely to occur near intersections that
are severely congested (Levels of Service (LOS) E or F). The primary intersection
serving this proposed development is the intersection of CSAH 96 and Round Lake Road, .
An analysis of this intersection, as summarized in Section21, demonstrated that the
intersection will be operating at LOS B during the peak traffic hour under the more
intensive development range, Therefore, no air quality problems are anticipated with an
office development between 225,000 and 495,000 square feet GFA at this site.
495,000
The MPCA does not typically require an air quality modeling analysis (for EA Ws or
ISPs) for intersections with a Level of Serviee of C or better one year after project
development. Air quality problems related to earbon monoxide emissions typically only
develop near intersections with congestion problems, Level of Service at the affeeted
intersections surrounding this development will be B or better after project development.
No congestion problems are anticipated,
Indirect Source Permit
The majority of Minnesota Rules Chapter 7023, which required certain projects that
increased traffic on local roadways to obtain an Indirect Source Permit (ISP) from the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) prior to the commencement of
construction, was repealed as of July 1,2001. The permit would have only been granted
if post-development compliance with State air quality and noise standards had been
demonstrated, and if funding was assured for any roadway improvements necessary to
achieve compliance.
e
Page 24
.
.
.
Gatewav Business Center - Arden Hills. MN
EAW
September 2001
23.
The ISP was required for all new projects having more than 2,000 parking spots. An ISP
was also required for new projects having between 1,000 and 2,000 parking spaces if the
busiest roadway within one-quarter mile of the project had existing traffic levcls of
greater than 8,333 vehicles per day. The proposed office development will include a
range of 1,069 and 2,351 parking spaces, and is sited within one-quarter mile of I-35W.
The development would therefore have required an ISP,
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) and any
greenhouse gases (such as carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide) and ozone-depleting
chemicals (chloro-fluorocarbons, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons or sulfur hexafluoride). Also
describe any proposed pollution prevention techniques and proposed air pollution control devices.
Describe the impacts on air quality.
The project will include the installation of natural gas-fired space heating devices in the
buildings. Natural gas combustion will generate small amounts of pollutants that will not
significantly affect air quality in the area,
The proposed office development scenario includes surface and elevated parking deck
options, These functions are not expected to produee extraordinary air emissions,
Standard rooftop unit mechanical ventilation systems will be utilized for the structures,
No additional pollution control devices will be required,
Page 25
Gatewav Business Center - Arden Hills, MN
EAW
September 2001
24.
Dust, Air and Noise Impacts. Will the project generale odors, noise or dust during construction or
during operation?
.
o Yes _D No
If yes, describe sources, characteristics, duration, quantities of 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 may be discussed at item 23 instead of here.)
Dust
Construction of the project will generate some dust. Mitigative measures, such as water
spraying on dirt surfaces will be used as necessary, Therefore, it is not anticipated that
fugitive dust will be generated in objectionable quantities. No odor emissions are
expected as a result of this project.
Noise
Noise will be generated from construction and increased traffic in the area, Construction
noise impacts will be mitigated by limiting construction to daytime hours and assuring
equipment is properly muffled.
The most noise sensitive receptors in the project area are the homes loeated along
Highway 96 north of the projeet. An analysis of peak-hour traffic levels on Highway 96
predict an increase of traffic levels of approximately 10-15 percent. This equates to an .
increased noise level of about 0.5 dBA, (A dBA is a unit of sound level expressed in
decibels and weighted for the purpose of determining the human response to sound,) This
is not a measurable increase in environmental noise. The facility is not expected to
generate significant nighttime traffic.
25. Sensitive Resources
Are any of the following resources on or in proximity to the site:
a. Archaeological, historical, or architectural resources? 0 Yes 0 No
b. Prime or unique farmlands? 0 Yes 0 No
c. Designated parks, recreation areas, or trails? 0 Yes 0 No
The proposed development includes a future city trail on Gateway Boulevard
specified in the Arden Hills Comprehensive Plan. An existing railroad bridge located
near the site may be converted to a pedestrian bridge crossing over 1-35W, This
bridge is located adjacent to the western boundary of the site,
Considerable discussion has taken place regarding the potential for a trail extension to
Long Lake Regional Park, utilizing the existing railroad bridge. MT Properties, owner
of the bridge, will require the Cities of Arden Hills and New Brighton to take .
responsibility for the bridge or have it removed as part of the railroad right-of-way
Page 26
.
e
e
Gatewav Business Center - Arden Hills. MN
September 2001
EAW
vacation. This may require a joint powers agreement between the two communities,
The developer will coopcrate with the Cities of Arden Hills and New Brighton, and
other agencies as this trail is planned and eventual improvcments are implemented,
d. Scenic views and vistas? 0 Yes 0 No
e. Other unique resources? 0 Yes 0 No
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? 0 Yes 0 No If yes, explain.
Lighting associated with construction and operation will meet the performance standards
specified in the Arden Hills Zoning Ordinance. Lights will be appropriately direeted and
coneealed with intensities that do not exceed those allowed in the Arden Hills Zoning
Ordinance.
27.
Compatibility with Plans. 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? 0 Yes 0 No
If yes, describe the plan, discuss its compatibility with the project and explain how any conflicts will
be resolved. If no, explain.
According to the City of Arden Hills Zoning Ordinance and the associated Zoning Map,
this site is designated as Gateway Business (Figure 4), This distriet was specifically
established to provide a flexible framework for the development of the northcast quadrant
of the 1-694 and I-35W interchanges. The Gateway Business district allows for flexibility
and a mix of business, multi-family residential, and office development. The City
requires that the mix, relationship and intensity of uses and buildings be compatible and
complementary with uses in the district and adjacent uses. Proposed developments must
meet building size, height, floor area ratio, landscaping, falfade, parking, traffic, signage,
lighting, utility, and drainage restrictions. The uses proposed for the Gateway Business
Center development are consistent with those allowable in the Gateway Business district.
The intensity and mix of the uses also meet the restrictions and standards imposed by the
ordinance,
Based on the Arden Hills Comprehensive Plan, the project site is designated on the
Future Land Use Plan for Industrial development (Figure 3). The Comprehensive Plan
notes that development in areas designated as Industrial may include a broad range of
industrial uses, including office, warehouse and manufacturing, The Plan notes that the
Gateway Business District, specified in the Zoning Ordinance, is designed: (1) to
promote high quality, unified, large-scale development; (2) to take advantage of the
site's visibility; (3) to protect the site's environmental resources; (4) to promote
flexibility in land uses and development standards; and (5) to allow flexibility in design
standards, The proposed development in terms of its scale, design, mix of uses and
Page 27
Gateway Business Center - Arden Hills, MN
EAW
September 2001
mitigation measures is consistent with the statements made in the Comprehensive Plan
relative to Industrial development and the Gateway Business District. e
28. Impact on Infrastructure and Public Services. Will new or expanded utilities, roads, other
infrastructure or public services be required to serve the project? 0 Yes D 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.)
Regional Stormwater Management Pond, An existing regional stormwater pond is
loeated in the northwest corner of the site, The pond was originally designed and built for
the Gateway Business Center development across Gateway Boulevard to the north of the
proposed development. This pond will be expanded and surface water runoff from the
proposed development will be piped to the pond, The pond will provide measures for
rate control and water quality treatment. The ATS Steel stormwater pond, located to the
east of the buildings, will be filled.
Water, The proposed office buildings will be connected to the City's eXlstmg 12"
watermain along Gateway Blvd for fire protection and domestic water service, (See
Grading, Utility, and Erosion Control Plan, sheet C1.0)
Transportation~
. The proposed improvements to County Road 96 mentioned above are antieipated to
be completed by the year 2005. The planned improvements to County Road 96 will .
be adequate for the added traffic.
. The recently completed improvements to Round Lake Road are adequate for the
additional traffic volumes generated by an office development that would reach the
upper end of the proposed 225,000 to 495,000 sq. ft. range.
. A study prepared for the City of Arden Hills by BRW, dated September 15, 1998,
analyzed potential additional developments that eould take place and still keep the
intersection of Round Lake Road and County Road 96 within design capacity, The
study concluded that an increase of 1,100 trips in the p.m, peak hour from the 52
acres still undeveloped could be accommodated, An office development at the upper
end of the proposed range would generate only 750 trips, which is less than what was
anticipated as a maximum in the BRW study,
29. Cumulative Impacts. Minnesota Rule part 4410.1700, subpart 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 sway 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).
e
Page 28
e
e
e
Gatewav Business Center - Arden Hills, MN
September 2001
EAW
None foreseen.
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.
Not applicable.
31. Summary of Issues. (This section need not be completed if the EAW is being done for EIS
scoping; instead, address relevant issues in the draft Scoping Decision document which must
accompany the EAW.) List any impacts and issues identified above that may require further
investigation before the project is commenced. Discuss any alternatives or mitigative measures
that have been or may be considered for these impacts and issues, including those that have been
or may be ordered as permit conditions.
Wetland Encroachment. Development of this project will require a limited amount of
wetland encroachment. Unavoidable wetland encroachment will be properly permitted
and mitigated and the major portion of the existing wetland systems will be preserved,
Proposed mitigation include 2:1 replacement of impacted wetland, including on-site
ponding,
Easements. The project includes three easement areas. The first, a sight line easement on
the Moms Communications parcel will be addressed in the replatting of the project site,
The second easement area, for an electric transmission line on the western part of the site,
will remain. A right-of-way owned by Mf PropertieslBurlington Northern Railroad is
currently being negotiated for purchase. Additional utility and road easements on the
assembled site must be vacated to allow for development.
Blanding's Turtles. Aecording to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources,
Blanding's Turtles, a state-threatened speeies, have been reported in the area and may
occur on the project site if habitat is suitable, However, the existing development (roads
and buildings) between known Blanding's turtle habitat and the project site probably has
resulted in the site being inaccessible to the Blanding's turtle population. The proposed
project will potentially provide habitat, in the form of wetlands and stormwater ponding,
for the Blanding's turtle. As suggested by the DNR, steps will be taken to protect any
Blanding's turtles on site as much as possible (see Sectionl3B of this EAW):
ATS Steel Environmental Assessment. A Phase I Environmental Assessment will need
to be conducted after the property is acquired and before the existing buildings are razed.
Groundwater Monitoring Wells. The existing groundwater monitoring wells, located in
the northwest portion of the site will remain in place.
Page 29
Gatewav Business Center - Arden Hills, MN
EAW
September 2001
Geotechnical Exploration Report. Recommendations for development, based on the
soils present on the site, should be followed, See Section 9 of this EA W for a detailed a
description of these recommendations. -
City Trail. The proposed development includes a future eity trail on Gateway Boulevard
specified in the Arden Hills Comprehensive Plan. An existing railroad bridge crossing 1-
35W and located near the site may be converted to a pedestrian bridge.
A potential for a trail extension to Long Lake Regional Park, utilizing the existing
railroad bridge is under discussion, MT Properties will require the Cities of Arden Hills
and New Brighton to take responsibility for the bridge or have it be removed as part of
the railroad right-of-way vacation, This may require a joint powers agreement between
the two communities. The proposer will cooperate with the Cities of Arden Hills and
New Brighton and other agencies as this trail is planned and eventual improvements are
implemented,
.
e
Page 30
e
e
.
Gatewav Business Center - Arden Hills. MN
September 2001
EAW
CERTIFICATIONS BY THE RGU (all 3 certifications must be signed for EQB acceptance of the EAW for
publication of notice in the EQB Monitory
A. I hereby certify that the information contained in this document is accurate and complete to the best of
my knowledge.
Signature
B. I hereby certify that the project described in this EAW is the complete project and there are no other
projects, project stages, or project components other than those described in this document, which are
related to the project as "connected actions" or "phased actions," as defined, respectively, at Minn.
Rules, pts. 4410,0200, subp. 9b and subp. 60.
Signature
C. I hereby certify that copies of the completed EAW are being sent to all points on lhe official EQB EAW
distribution list.
Signature
Title of signer
Date
Environmental Assessment Worksheet was prepared by the staff of the Environmental Quality Board at
Minnesota Planning. For additional information, worksheets or for EAW Guidelines, contact: Environmental
Quality Board, 658 Cedar St., St. Paul, MN 55155, 651-296-8253, or www.mnplan.state.mn.us
Page 31
USGS Map with Project Location
N
L\
.
Arden Hills EAW
Arden Hills, Minnesota
2000
2fJOO Ft~t
Februery6,:2001
Page 32
Figure 1
e
e
e
e
e
.
County Map with Project Location
N
A
-
Arden Hills EAW
Arden Hills, Minnesota
10000
10000 F....I
fe=brullry6,2001
Page 33
Figure 2
e
~
"
m
~
e
! i
.
Ii
:e,'i'i
iif
. . !
_.~-,~.:....-..--~-
, '
,. ,
, I
,l
~---.' C--', i
e
J
Page ,34
.
II'" 1~~j~j~'Wj'jJ'~~'0 ON
....... C,"l, '." ','-:.""_.J ~ 0_'
IS . ~ ~ 0;'"
I '
.'.'. - ' - -.
. -"",'
,,- .
~
;..:'
~
I;
:t'
.
"". "!
-- .fi
~ II'
nul
: : 1 II
""' .. .:
,
I
,
.
!
Page 3'5
t/) ('I)
- (])
- c ...
.- :J
::I: co Ol
- .
c Q)a.. co
Q)
Q) Q)
1J s... Q) .,-
;j t/) ...
s... (])
<('5=> .0
E
't-L1."C (])
>
o c 0
z
~ CO
..J
.-
U
..
l! _
lil -8 ,J:
l! ~ j ~
~ ....! 'i!
~ 'i! ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~
. ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ·
!!i~~ ~'~J
~iij,i~.il~ ~
~ '" '" .. .. ij ,v'",'.'i;!, I
, . , 2 ~ ' ~ Ji"','t" If.
'!:!. ~ ~ ~ ,~ ,~. 8i~,~ ~ l
lllllllmri'OI
, ~
z~
;
"5
.\i
~
G'
Page 36
.
e
.
tn
-
-
.-
J: C- o
O'
c: co 0
N
Q)~ (0
" 0) '-
<D
s... .0
<( .= E
<D
'+- c: (,)
<D
0 0 0
~N
......
.-
(J
"<t
<D
'-
::J
OJ
u::
.
'~
u f
~ i
i ~ I
LjUiii J P .
iJ!~li~'iI.!i)JiS ~
~ f ~ ~ l J j j ~ I & I
~H j, ~ , j~ :.
~ f j 1 i ! ! ~ ~ ! ~ ! ~ ~ I i I
~..............~.
.
Page 37
t
J
~
I .
I
~
o
~
<I)
~
i'~ ~ i'~
~H~! I I
ffllii~!~ Il
f.. ~ ~
i
J
,
,
,
,
,
,
I
. '
,
,
:
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
J
,
,
,
,
,
I
f
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
."'-"__' I
:<.1"1/
..11
, . If
-:,) ,ff
I!.Jf
IIi
.J r
/1
/ I
, '
, '
, '
/ :
./ :
, '
, '
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
:
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
Cl
\;)
~
~~
/
/
/
,
/
/
/
/
/
~/
/
/
/
/
/
:,c"
/
_J:::::_ ---------- ---------'--'
~~~~ ' ' .
~
---
----
Page-
38
~:~,',!'I.
, ","" ''l!~ ,"
..-,.'<__'ll"'C..
"_<i.'Jl';
:;, :~-'-'~ ,~~
;'j i
.
1"+,'
0:-'," '"
o
z'
!
u
~~
;::=>
.=
, ~.
~i
~.\{tt'"
~,:~-
A~~
1:11 i
l!)
Q)
.....
:J
~.
.
.
e
.
.
AI'/.!!~PIJ< 13
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Natural Heritage and:lh\llng..j<\~~arch Program, Box 25
51. Paul, Minnesota 55] 55-40_
Phone: (651)2 96-7863 Fax: (651) 296-1811 E-mail: sarah.hoffman@dnr,slate,mn,us
December 28, 2000
Carissa Schively
Dahlgren, Shardlow, & Uban, Inc.
300 1'" Ave, N" Suite 210
Minneapolis, MN 55401
Re: Request for Natural Heritage information for vicinity of proposed Gateway Business Center, TION
R23W S.21, Ramsey County.
NHNRP Contact #: ERDB 20010542
Dear Ms. Schively,
The Minnesota Natural Heritage database has been reviewed to determine if any rare plant or
animal species or other significant natural features are known to occur within an approximate one-mile
radius of the area indicated on the map enclosed with your information request. Based on this review,
there are 11 known occurrences of rare species or natural communities in the area searched (for details,
see enclosed databaseprin.tout andexplanati()n of selected fields). Following are specific conunents for
only those..e1ements that may be impacted by the proposed projeet. Rare feature occurrences not
listed below are not antiCipated to be affected by the proposed project.
. Blanding's turtles (Emydoidea blandingii), a state threatened species, have been reported from
the area and may occur on the project site if habitat is suitable (see enclosed fact sheets),
However, the development (roads and buildings) between known Blanding's turtle habitat and
the project site probably has resulted in the site being inaccessible to the Blanding's turtle
population which occurs near the project site, In the event that Blanding's turtles are found on
the site, please remember that destruction of threatened or endangered species is prohibited by
state law and rules, except under certain prescribed conditions,
The Natural Heritage database is maintained by the Natural HeriUlge and Nongame Research
Program, a unit within the Division of Ecological Services, Department of Natural Resources, It is
continually updated as new information becomes available, and is the most complete souree of data on
Minnesota's rare or otherwise significant species, natural conununities, and other natural features, Its
purpose is to foster better understanding and protection of these features,
Because our information is not based on a comprehensive inventory, there may be rare or
otherwise significant natural features in the state that are not represented in the database, A eounty-by-
county survey of rare natural features is now underway, and has been completed for Ramsey County.
Our information about natural communities is, therefore, quite thorough for that county. However,
because survey work for rare plants and animals is less exhaustive, and because there has not been an
on-site survey of all areas of the county, ecologically significant features for which we have no records
may exist on the project area,
DNR Information: 651-296-6157 . 1-888-646-6367 . 1TY: 651-296-5484 . 1-800-657-3929
An Equal Opportunity Employer
Who Values Diversity
o
Prinled on Recycled Paper Containing a
Minimum 0110% Post-Consumer Waste
~
0 H~
0
0 "
0 V
N 0 P<1'l<P-i .
.
, . Z Z Z
o " 0 0 0
N " f:: H H
'0 ... ...
~ ~ HHH:'<:;'::~M
'" in~~~~
~ ~
0
'"
u . :l:l:l:l
'" v
0 " l~i~H565
v
,"' H H H H
'" t:'J(?t!lC!
" 0 " WWt.:lli:l
'00 '" "' "' "' ll:: ~ p::; p:;
.0 ~ '" '" '"
" N H H f::~~!H!
" ... ...
'Ov Q H H t1 ~~j
" -" '" U U
" '" ~
'0 Z Z Z ~~ ~~
~ " ~ H H H
rl '" ~~~ 00 00
'" .,., .,.,
~ 0
rl U
rl
N E
"' "
~ "
'"
~ 0
N "
~ ~
Z -" N
0 U ~ #
~ " N
... " #
. 00 m 00 00 00 til 0 M ""
. OO"'N ~OO 0 Ulcoooa:l
>< . N~~ OO~r10\Do.Dr--
... '" ### ~re:!:::
13 "
0 E "''''''' gi:~g:~~;S
u " .,.,.,
'" ......... ...:I ~ E-< f-< E-q....
>< C ~~~ ~"'~~~~~
'" 0 .
"' Z
~ '0 "' "' "' r;lOOtiOOUl "'
c i1 :r::: ::>: ~ :> i1
" ~ ~ ;,Ia'" ""
~. ~ ZZ
. '" H H H >:ilClHOHHH
'" '" I ~~~ HPH~
!Z "
V
'" '0 OOOOjlJjmlIlm
U " "'''''''
. '" --- - ~oo~~~
"' '" ~ HHHN"~H
"' H H H
'" rl ~ HHH#U) Hoc( H H H
:'i " iU~hU ~~ ~
k 8
i'l 0 HHH
V ~H
'" i! u
0
~ '0 llJ III iJ< '"1 ~ till:!!::S "'''''''
f>i c ... H
'" " ~i'.1~:3<e;~ :2 ~~~
"' Q
Ii !Z aBB2a~a ro 0 0 0
" ~ H H H
~ o~8 E--<P-O 000
~ ~r'1~~ 0000
'" ~~B
.,
'" t.:Ili:lr<l ~ooo ow 1J:l...
'"
~
N
"' "'
"'
. ~
. u
" gHlj '" '" Z~ ~ !li
.Q ~ '" ~ i'i 0," '"
" "' ...... ... "' z ... ... ...
V
"
Q "'
" . ~
'"'0 Q rl
" k '" rl
V 0 '" 00
~ u
" "
" '"
'"
" ~~
rl U
" "
" " Ht1 "
0 k '"
V " ~'" ~oooo 00 ~ ~ r--!'-NNN !Z
" 0 ~oo rlrlrl M r'l H rl.....f'lNN
Z U " ~ " " ~ ~ " ~ H .
U "" " g;
" 0 ~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~
V Z NNN N"'N NN N N N
0 V '" '" ~ '" ~ ~ '" "'''' '" ~ '" "'
. " '"
. . zzz z z z zz z z z '"
" E 000 000 00 0 0 0 '"
" . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~M~ M M M M M U
'orl ~ 000 000 00 0 0 0 '"
~ w ......... ...... ... ...... ... ... ... '"
e
e
e
Rare Features Database Print-outs: An Explanation of Fields
The Rare Features database is part of the Natural Heritage Information System,
and is maintained by the Natural Heritage and N<?ngame Research Program,
a unit within the Section of Ecological Sen'ices,
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR).
"Please note that the print-outs are copyrighted and may not be reproduced without permissionH
Field N arne: [Full (non-abreviated) field name, if different). Further explanation of field.
-C-
CBS Site: [County Biological Survey site number]. In each county, the numbering system begins with I,
CLASS: A code which classifies features by broad taxonomic group: NC = natural community; SA = special animal; SP =
special plant; GP = geologic process; GT = geologic time; OT = other (e,g, colonial waterbird colonies. bat hibemacula).
Qy: [County], Minnesota counties (ordered alphabetically) are numbered from I (Aitkin) to 87 (Yellow Medicine).
CURRENT STA TUS: Present protection status, from 0 (owner is not aware of record) to 9 (dedicated as a Scientific and
Natural Area).
-0-
DNR Reeion: I =NW, 2=NE, 3=E Central, 4=SW, 5=SE, 6= Minneapolis/St, Paul Metro,
DNR Ouad: [DNR Quadrangle code], DNR-assigned code of the U.S. Geologic Survey topographic map on which the rare
feature occurs.
-E-
ELEMENT or Element: See "Element Name (Common Name)"
Element Name (Common Name): The name of the 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 plant communities, which have
no scientific name) it is solely the element name.
EO RANK: [Element Occurrence Rank], An evaluation of the quality and condition of natural communities from A (highest)
to D (lowest),
EO Size: [Element Occurrence Size], The size in acres (often estimated) of natural communities.
-F-
FED STATUS: [Federal Status]. Status of species under the Federal Endangered Species Law: LE=endangered.
L T=threatened, C=species which have been proposed for federal listing.
Federal Status: See "FED STATUS"
Forestrv District: The Minnesota DNR's Division of Forestry district number.
-G-
GLOBAL RANK: The abundance of an element globally, from OJ (critically imperiled due to extreme rarity on a world-wide
basis) to G5 (demonstrably secure, though perhaps rare in parts of its range). Global ranks are determined by the Conservation
Science Division of The Nature Conservancy.
-1-
INTENDED STATUS: Desired protection status. See also "CURRENT STATUS." If a complete list of protection status
codes is needed, please contact the Nan....al Heritage Program.
-L-
LAST OBSERVED or Last Observed Date or Last Observation: Date of the most recent record of the element at the location.
Latitude: The location at which the occurrence Is mapped on Natural Heritage Program maps. NOTE: There are various
levels of precision in the original information, but this is not reflected in the latitude/longitude data. For some of the data,
particularly historical records, it was not possible to determine exactly where the original observation was made (e,g. "Fort
Snelling", or "the south shore of Lake Owasso"). Thus the latitude/longitude reflect the mapped location, and not necessarily
the observation location,
Leeal: Township, range and section numbers.
Lone: [Longitude], See NOTE 'under "Latitude"
-M-
MANAGED AREA or Manae:ed Area(s): Name of the federally, state, locally, or privately managed park, forest, preserve,
etc" containing the occurrence, ifany, If this field is blank, the element probably occurs on private land, [f"(STA TUTORY
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. ' .
Mao Svm: [Map Symbol].
MN ST A 111S: [Minnesota Status], Legal status of plant and animal species under the Minnesota endangered species law:
END~endangered, THR ~threatened, SPC~special concern, NON= no legal status, but rare and may become listed if declines
continue. This field is blank for natural communities and colonial waterbird nesting sites, which have no legal status in ..
Minnesota, but are tracked by the database. .
-N-
NC Rank: [Natural Community Rank],
-0-
Occ #: [Occurrence Number]. The occurrence number, in combination with the elenient name, uniquely identifies each record,
OCCURRENCE NUMBER: See "Occ #"
# OF OCCURS: The number of records existent in the database for each element within the area searched,
Ownershio: Indicates whether the site is publicly or privately owned; for publicly owned land, the agency with management
responsibility is listed,
-P-
Precision: Precision oflocational infonnation of occurrence: C (conftrnled) = known within 1/4 mile radius, U (unconfirmed)
~ known within 1/2 mile, N (non-specific) ~ known within I mile, G (general) ~ occurs within the general region, X
(unmappable}=location is unmappable on USGS topographic quadrangles (often known only to the nearest county), 0
(obscure/gone}=element no longer exists at the location,
PS: [Prhnary Section], The section con:aining all or the grealest par" of the occurrenc'"
-Q-
Ouad Mao: See "DNR Quad"
-R-
Rec #: [Record number],
RNG or Rn2' [Range number],
~ ,
SECTION or Section: [Section number(s)], Some records are given only to the nearest section (s), but most are given to 'the
nearest quarter-section or quarter-quarter-section (e,g" SWNW32 denotes the SWII4 of the NWt/4 of section 32), A "0" is
used as a place holder when a half-section is specified (e,g" ON03 refers to the north 1/2 of section 3), When a occurrence
crosses section boundaries, both sections are listed, without punctuation (e,g" the NEt/4 of section 19 and NWI/4 of section e
20 is displayed as "NEI9NW20"),
Site: A name which refers to the geographic area within which the occurrence lies, Ifna name for the area exists (a locally
used name, for example), one is assigned by the County Biological Surveyor the Natural Heritage Program,
Source: The collector or observer of the rare feature occUlTence.
S RANK: [State Rank], A rank assigned to the natural community type which reflects the known extent and condition of that
community in Minnesota. Ranks range from I (in greatest need of conservation action in the state) to 5 (secure under present
conditions), A "?" following a rank indicates little infonnation is available to rank the community, Communities for which
infonnation is especially scarce are given a "U", for "rank undetennined". The ranks do not represent a legal status, They are
used by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to set priorities for research, inventory and conservation planning,
The state ranks are updated as inventory infonnation becomes available.
State Status: See "MN S1' A 111S"
-1'-
TWP or~: [Township llumber].
-y-
Verification: A reflection of the reliability of the infonnation on which the record is based, The highest level of reliability is
"verified," which usually indicates a collection was made or, in the case of bird records, nesting was observed, Plant records
based on collections made before t 970 are unverified,
Voucher: The museum or herbarium where specimells are mairttained, and the accession llumber assigned by the repository.
Irt the case of bald eagles, this is the breeding area llumber~
-w-
Wildlife Area: The Minnesota DNR's Section of Wildlife administrative number.
Data Security
Locations of some rare features must be treated as sensitive information because widespread knowledge of these locations could resl.llt in harm to
the rare features, For example. wildflowers such as orchids and ~nomically valuable plants such: as ginseng IlRvulnerable to exploitation bycotlcclOrs;
othcr species. such as bald cagles. an: sensitive to disturbance by observers. For this reason,. we prcfcrthal publications not identify thc precis.c:lOC:a1ions of e
vulnerable species. We suggest describing the location only to the nearest section.. If this is not ac:ceptable for your purposes. please call and d.ISCllSS this
issue with the Environmental Review Specialist for the Heritage and Nongame Research Program at 651/296-8319.
Rnised 02/99
e
e
e
-
L.IFE HISTORY INFORMA TION (._ ""'" c_.".........., ,_ .11'..._.. .".. ~_ ~_ t. __,
DESCRIPTION: .
The Bllnding's runl. is a medium tlllarg. !UnI. WllIl a blecx or datil blu" dom.sI'Iaped ",.11 WllIl
muted yellow spots and ca~. Th. cottom of Ill. sn.1I . hi"'Jed acrose Ill. front lIlird enabli"'J th. !UnI. to
pull tile front edge Of the lower ,shell ftrmly against th. top ",.11 to IJ(01lid. additlona' protKllon wIl.n
threatened, rhe head and ap~ndag.. are dark brown or clu~ray WllIl smlll dots of light brown or
yellow. A distinctiv. fl.,d mer.k is tll. bri911t y,'low cllin and neck. Th. av.rag. adult Blanding's runl.
ranges from 6 to 9 Inches tn stmlght lin. upper ",.III.ngtI'I.
HABITAT:
Shallow, 510'.'.' m"iling '..;atllr witt; fflU'J t;..)ttorTll\ anu abundant aquatic: veg.talkln are preferred C'(
Blanding's !UnI... E:rtenSN' marsh.. COrdemg nwr. proo.<ide 'IICellent habitat In MinnlSOla. Blanding s
tunl.. are pnmari/y mlrsh and POnd inlllbitlntl'nd Ire fttqUently rauna. in asacClalion WllIl snapptng and
painted !UnI... Brlndi"'J's turtl.. protect ttlemMl'_ from freellng lMnp.,atur.. by ove,.,..,ntenng In the
muddy cottoms of marsh.. and po~
LIFE HISTORY:
IndMcluals em.rg. from ov.rwlnteri"'J .nd begin ...."lng innl1y Apr1I on warm, sunny days.
Nesting occurs dUri"'J th. IIrst two weelal of June in M1nntICIW. Fema/ee are m~ ac:llV. In lat. aftemoon
and at dusll, Aftll!' crawling up to 1 mil. and Irting egge, temaJeelNy hide n_ a busn and retum to ttI.
marsh th. next diY, especially in th. ..11y morning. Th. n.. iI dug byo lfle tern.,. in an open sandy are.
where 8-15 eggs are laid. After a d.....opment period of app......dtn...,., two montM, hatChlings I.av. tIl.
nest from mid-August to 'Ir/y-Octoblll' with an average shell Iengtt\ of 1 1/4 indlee, Often, tIley must mlk.
a long ov.rland trell to ftnd watll!' .
Blanding's turtles are mild m.nnered and do not attempt to bite, If molftted or threatened tIley
simply pull into lIlejr snell and wait for dangll!' to pua. Nests and young of BI'ndlng's tunles rail victim to
racoonl, skunks, and predatory llirda. Adults are partleul.rty 'IIllnerable to being struck by automoboles
whli. crossing roads.
RECOMMENOATIONS:
W. off.r th. following guid.lln.. conc.ming constructlon and land use to h"p minimize impacts on tunlll,
. Worke~ should be informec:l of tIl. preeenee of Blinding', Turtl.. in th. arel.
. Roads should be kept to minimal stlIndlrdl on widltlI and 18neL
. Roads snould be ~. noceutbec:l or belowgr.de. If am. m_be UMd 4' high curbs at a 3:1
slope art pr.ferred. B'-ndIng', Turtl..ll_ gmt dIl'IIculty cllrnlling lradilIQn.1 curbs, Curtis and
bell'Weta'l~; ro~ b'iil tu."'le<Illil tIIlI rWld ~~ fOfd kiI&
. WIlen wolldng n_ '...&k.1dl1iIt fencing shouJc:I be lit Ut) tD keep turtl4ie out of construction areas.
it is glIIaI tMt silt r.nc. be removed .n.r thllIMll.llMn rewgetated.
. Oitcll. should noc be fIlO.vec:l bet\...n JUM 1st and Octiobef 111l
Cu'" Clll."dIng ...cIand ar.. should be _-lind and elIptIceI or box III fadlbt. turtle
mOll....llae 1111 WWllandI.
UtilIy r = and mlinfllnance roadIlIIouId be kept III . "**num.
. Veg' - LIMI".UmentundwpOw.lIn'''''Ouldbedone~MdbetwMnOctobet1st
and~111l ~lIIouldnocbeUlld.
. BIlGw;round ~conIIrucIon... should be rtCllmId ID ...1wIo.. gnIde. Erosion snould be
'prw.ntId from re.ching wehndI and IIlla ,
. Graded ..... should be revegetaWd wittl n.tIw wgetdon. Use of ,., &lrIand pestIcid.. should
be avoidec:l.
· All wellllldl should be pro~ from ro8d run-ofr. flWll and otIIer chemic81 run-off by a naturally
vegltat8d buffw strip.
. Shlllow. YeQItIWd welllndll (Type 2 & 3) should not be dredged or d...-nec:l.
. Landscaping should be I.ft .. n.tural... pc Ilitlle.
. T.rrain should be left wittl .. much natural COntllut.. ~ c 'LJ.t.
. Road placement sIIould avoid IlPlrellng wellllldl from -.,1 cent uplMdl and should avotd
billclIng wetlllldL
,
e
~...~ -oS>!
CAUTION
e
BLANDING'S TURTLES
MAY BE ENCOUNTERED
IN THIS AREA
~
Tho uniqUe and ,.... .................. found III tIIIa.... Ikn...t. tuItIII_ a sa.
Thl'..tened "1 . ........ ~_I 1:1II11I uncIk ____ II I.......... 'd,.;llMUf 'T1lnftaMd
lIncllndanteM I, I' - 111... C8IwfUl of..... ..,... _. ~*"-i;tfoa..... Turtln
slloulclIM mo........ ..III...... .....lIwcL IlIlomLItlln.... Net ...-J1" Mana Oft IIancIlnt'.
lurttu caa 1M found .. 1M IIecIl of tIIIa notice. .,I.1f I nell1lfMm II J n .. ..... _1M olltalnocl
'rom 1M Non... V--. ~ loa 7, DIM .,.1111111.. _ LA .-...lW.,............. "1~
4007. (112) 2t7~"" . 'L
e
BLANDING'S TURTLE
"'!
-
Emydoidea blandingii (Holbrook)
~j/
/
/
- ~ .~.-- ";{
(>" .r ~ ~':">:~"f,.,;-.\"",.,~.....~*",-
----. :-~, ~,_.-t'-'~.___
_ -,-- ..- ""--4':::\'~. <:::.
(>._ _e/ '<~:. ;.~
... --/.~; ~/...., \....~-----
c- _ _, ' ,,- A
~~.~ . "'"'-< '....r'"_'''''~
~~ ' ",- ">;.;, ,~ ~,," f!/^
~~ ~"""-'~-......l""
i-- -_-~o~ ---_
~ - ~ ~'~
--'~. I> .-..' ~." . "~
. .<,,~~~,
I (.:i.... '-.; '-J
. 6: .~" ;
~
,-
-... --'~
-~~
.
e
e
e1988. Stale of Minnesota. Ven. Min& Woni
OFFICIAL STAreS: Threatened
BASIS FOR STATUS: Although formerly more widespread. the Bland4
ing's turtle is now restricted to a small number of stAtes and provinces in
the Upper Midwest. stretching from Nebraska eastward to Michigan. On.
tario. and Quebec. A smaller remnant population. spanning portions of a
few New England Slates, as well as a number of scauered populations
throughout the Nonheast. testify to the lurtle's more e~panded range in
earlier times. Minnesota lies on the nonhwest periphery of the species'
range. An extensive area of sand dunes and marshes along the Mississippi
River. south of the town ofKeUogg. is recognized as a majorconcemration
area for the turtle and may be one of the largest breeding populations in
its entire range. Elsewhere in the state, the Blanding's tunle has a more
spouy distribution. following the Mississippi and 5t. Croix rivers nonh~
ward into easH:entral Minnesota and the Minnesota River westward into
the south-central portions of the state. Two recent records from Pipestone
COU~ltyalso confirm the species' presence in the Missouri Ri'.'er drainage
of extreme southwestern Minnes0t3.
As a marsh inhabitant the recent destruction ofwetla~d habitats by drain~
age and/or inundation for agricultural 'purposes. river channelization. and
water impoundment has greatly decreased available habitat for the species.
Like other turtles. the Blanding's turtle is also vulnerable 10 collecting as
a desirable pet species ($45 for a 15 to 20 centimeter turtle); it is easily col-
lected in areas where it is abundant. especially during me neiting season.
The species' life history also makes this tunle particularly susceptible to
human disturbances. as evidenced by a long tenn and intensive study of
the population inhabiting the Kellogg Dunes (Pappas. personal communi-
cation). Some feaNTes contributing to this susceptibility are late matura-
tion. low reproductive potential (one clutch/season). long~hved adults.
and high mortality of eggs and juveniles. Population and repnxtuctive dy~
namics suggest viable populations of Blanding's tunles are dependent on
large numbers of animals and adequate areas of undisturbed habital.
PREFERRED HABITAT: The preferred habitat of the Blanding's turtle
includescalrn. shallow water. rich; aquatic vegetation and sandy uplands
for nesting. Studies by CongdOlI elal. (1983) in Michigan and by Linck
(personal communication) in Massachusetts have shown that nesting fe-
males may travel considerable distances (200 to 400 meters) to a nesting
area. passing enroute what appears to be suitable nesting habitat immedi-
ately adjacent to the marsh in w.hich they reside.
AID TO IDENTIFICATION: Blanding's turtle is medium-sized. averag-
iog IS to 2S centimeters in length. The species' most diagnostic field char~
acteristics are its smooth. domed upper shell. or carapace, and its bright
yellow neck. throat. and chin. The carapace usually appears bluish black..
with ;;umerous sp.ed:s of yellow throughout. The lower shell. :>r plastron.
is bright yellow with black patches on the outside margin. In general. the
adult male can he distinguished from the female by its slightly indented
plastron and longer tail. The most distinct fealUrc of the plastron is the
hinge, which allows the lUrtle to raise the plastron upward and provide
more protection to the soft extremities that it has pulled inside the shell.
For this reason me species is often referred to as a "semibo;w;" turtle.
RECOMMENDATIONS: Efforts to identify, protect, and preserve pre-
ferred habitats of lhis species should be continued. panicularly where
populalions are locally abundant. Additional information on the species'
local distribution and abundance should also be collected to allow an ac-
curate assessment of its current status and to aid in protection efforts.
SELECTED REFERENCES: Breckenridge 1944: Conant 1975; Con-
gdon et al, 1983;Ewert 1982; Graham and Doyle 1977: McCoy 1973;
Yogt 1981.
Blanding's. Turtle: adult viewed from above nop) and below (bonom): ..ide
view shown in silhouette.
C::;[':;':-. ...~ ~!.,l L~F/;:;::"',"'T1U~i:::'", (ol;.). 198:5. /'~m,".L"~"_ 'L-"::':".c:I~.!. '~L ~ :-::' ~- ~"
lni;'~""~J' oi M~:me.s.c~a Press.. ML'1Jleapoh~ for lhc Min-.c:;;o'" 1~',,,p' "f ','.., -__._i ',' ~ .
_ .. _......... i..... j <h:..o... ,~_~..:
December 28, 2000
11J"J"RNPlx.
C--.
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
.
Ms, Carissa Schively
Dahlgren Shardlow and Uban
300 First Avenue North, Suite 210
Minneapolis, MN 55401
RE: Property Transfer File Evaluation
Dear Ms, Schively:
This letter is in response to your request regarding environmentally contaminated sites in the vicinity of
the Gateway Business Center, northeast quadrant of the I-35W and 1-694 intersection, in Arden Hills,
Minnesota, We understand that Dahlgren Shardlow and Uban is requesting information regarding the
above-referenced property,
Regarding your request, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) staff has conducted a limited
file evaluation within a one-mile radius of the referenced property, The file evaluation included the
review of the following: .
(I) EPA-
(2) EPA-
(3) MPCA-
National Priorities List (NPL);
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Information System (CERCLIS);
Permanent List of Priorities (PLP);
List (1) and (3) are the respective federal and state Superfund lists, Sites on these lists are added and
deleted by a specific administrative process, Sites on these lists have confirmed contamination and are
under various stages of investigation and remediation, List (2) is a national inventory of suspected or
confirmed hazardous waste sites. Sites on this list that warrant further investigation or remediation are
candidates for further action under the state and/or federal Superfund programs,
( 4) MPCA-
(5) MPCA-
(6) MPCA-
(7) MPCA-
( 8) MPCA-
(9) MPCA-
(10) MPCA-
(II) EPA-
(12) MPCA-
(13) MPCA-
(14) MPCA-
(IS) MPCA-
Hazardous Waste Generator/Investigation and Cleanup List;
List of Permitted Solid Waste Facilities;
RCRA Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities;
1980 Metropolitan Area Waste Disposal Site Inventory;
1980 Statewide Open Dump Inventory;
Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup (VIe) Unit List;
Sites Delisted from Permanent List of Priorities;
No Further Remedial Action Planned (NFRAP) Sites, removed from
CERCLIS by EP A;
Closed Landfill Sites Undergoing Cleanup;
Other;
Brownfields; and
Minnesota No Further Action (MN-NF A) List.
.
520 Lafayette Rd, N,; 81. Paul, MN 55155-4194; (651) 296-6300 (Voice); (651) 292-5332 (TTY)
81. Paul . Brainerd' Detroit Lakes . Duluth . Mankato . Marshall . Rochester' Willmar; www.pca.state.mn.us
Equal Opportunity Employer. Printed on recycled paper containing at least 20% fibers from paper recycled by consumers.
e
e
e
Ms, Carissa Schively
Page Two
Databases (4) through (9) are used by the MPCA to track various categories of sites, Database (4) is a
listing of Hazardous Waste Generators that have been involved in some stage of investigation and/or
cleanup with the MPCA staff providing technical review of the investigation and any necessary remedial
activities, Upon investigation, a number of these properties have been cleaned up or found to not require
any cleanup work, Database (5) and (6) identify facilities that handle solid or hazardous wastes and may
not have experienced any releases. For databases (7) and (8), releases of contaminants at particular sites
may not be yet confirmed or file information is limited, Database (9) is a registry of properties at which a
voluntary investigation has been or is being conducted, with MPCA staff providing technical review of
the investigation and any necessary remedial activities, A number of these properties have been
investigated and cleaned up or found to not require any cleanup work, Database (10) identifies sites that
have been delisted from the Permanent List of Priorities. Database (1 ]) identifies sites that have been
removed from CERCLlS by EPA, Database (]2) identifies closed landfill sites that are undergoing
landfill cleanup. Database (] 3) identifies sites that are in some stage of investigation, These sites do not
meet the parameters of the other categories listed, Database (14) contains sites where public funds must
be expanded for investigation or cleanup to stimulate redevelopment. Lastly, database (]5) consists ofa
list of sites where soil or groundwater contamination or the potentia] for contamination is present. These
sites have been reviewed, but received no further action status because of no known risk to human health
or the environment.
We have no listings from the above categories under "Gateway Business Center" or at the exact address
given for the property, However, our file evaluation has revealed that the following sites are within a
one-mile radius of the referenced property and are located on the attached map by the Identification
Number in brackets:
o [713] Twin Cities Army Ammunition Plant, vicinity of the Highway 10 and Highway 96
intersection, Arden Hills (],2,3,6,7);
o [3758] MacGilIis and Gibbs, 5th Avenue Northwest, New Brighton (],2,3,4);
o [332] Northwest Refinery, Former, northwest of Old Highway 8 and 14th Street Northwest, New
Brighton (2,3);
o [1021] Trio Solvent Site, northwest ofO]d Highway 8 and ]4th Street Northwest, New Brighton
(3);
o [727] Tar Pit Northwest Refining-2, between Old Highway 8 and Round Lake, New Brighton (7);
o [724] Tar Pit Northwest Refining, between Long Lake and Round Lake, approximately the ]600
block, New Brighton (7);
o [729] Cement Dump Site, north of] -694 and northwest of County Road 77, between the two sets of
railroad tracks, New Brighton (7);
o [730] Barrels, Midwest Asphalt, north ofI-694, northwest of County Road 77, approximately the
900 block, New Brighton (7);
Ms, Carissa Schively
Page 1bree
.
o 1734] Milton Demolition Dump, southeast quadrant of the 1-35W and Soo Line Railroad crossing,
approximately the 100 block, New Brighton (7);
o [1121] Vandel Dump (AKA: Milton Demolition Dump Site), southeast quadrant of the 1-35W and
Soo Line Railroad crossing, approximately the 100 block, Arden Hil1s (7);
o 11110] City of New Brighton Dump Site, vicinity of the 14th Street Northwest and 1-35W
intersection, New Brighton (7);
o [5338] Farm Service Coop, 1427 Old Highway 8, New Brighton (9);
o 14551] Butcher's Al1otment, 8,3 acres, Arden Hil1s (9);
o [4325] Round Lake Business Center, 4354 - 4396 Round Lake Road West, Arden Hil1s (9);
0[4507] C.O,c. Industries, Inc., 1275 Old Highway 8, New Brighton (9);
o [4936] 2108 Old Highway 8, New Brighton (9);
o [3405] New Brighton Redevelopment, 5th Avenue and 8th Street, New Brighton (9); and
.
o 11119] Old Mil1er Dump Site, northeast of the 1-694 and Old Highway 8 intersection,
approximately one-fourth square mile in size, New Brighton (7,14),
Enclosed are:
o a list of Facilities with Air Emission Violations within the cities of Arden Hil1s and New Brighton;
o a list of Air Permitted Facilities within the cities of Arden Hil1s and New Brighton; and
o a list of facilities reported on the Corrective Action Detailed Verification Report for the 55112 zip
code area. This information was obtained from the V,S, Environmental Protection Agency
database,
Please note that the database containing Hazardous Waste generators has been moved to a new
database. As usual, we can perform queries on specific addresses to see if a site is listed as a
generator. If the site in question is a registered generator this will be noted in the body of this
letter as has been in the past. Unfortunately though, we cannot produce Hazardous Waste Reports
at this time due to the computer upgrade in progress. This upgrade should be completed within the
next several months, At that time, if you wish to reeeive the data, we wil1 provide it at no additional
charge, In the meantime, please accept our apologies for this inconvenience,
Our search revealed that no Hazardous Waste Generators of hazardous materials have been reported
under the title and/or the exact address given for the property,
.
.
.
.
Ms, Carissa Schively
Page Four
The file evaluation also included an information retrieval from the TALES database, which contains
information about under/aboveground storage, leaks, and spills of petroleum products and/or hazardous
substances. It is managed and updated continuously by MPCA staff. No under/aboveground storage tank
instaIlations, leaking under/aboveground storage tanks, or spills of hazardous substances and/or
petroleum products have been reported under the title and/or the exact address given for the property,
Enclosed are:
o A list of registered underground storage tank instaIlations and a list ofleaking under/aboveground
storage tanks reported within the 55112 zip code area; and
o a list of emergency responses that have been reported in Arden Hills and New Brighton,
The Leaking Underground Storage Tank (Lust) Sites within a Yz mile radius are identified on the second
map by their Leak Identification number, Also, included is a list of LUST Sites within the 55112 zip
code area that do not appear on the LUST map due to inadequate location information. For further
information regarding these sites please contact Dianne Mitzuk at (651) 297-8499,
We suggest that you also contact the cities of Arden Hills and New Brighton or Ramsey County regarding
the location of pipelines, under/aboveground storage tanks, and possible spills of petroleum products
and/or hazardous substances which may have occurred in the area.
For concems regarding Leaking Under/Aboveground Storage Tanks or Spills of petroleum products
and/or hazardous substances reports, please refer to the enclosed Leak/Spill and Under/Aboveground
Storage Tank File Request Form.
If you have questions regarding sites reported on the following lists, please contact the staff person listed
below:
(2)
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Gary Krueger
Compensation, and Liability Information
System (CERCLIS)
Permanent List of Priorities (PLP) Gary Krueger
RCRAlInvestigation and Cleanup Sites Greg Berger
Metro and Statewide Open Dump Inventory Chris Malec
Voluntary Cleanup Program VIC Staff
Sites Delisted from Permanent List of Priorities Gary Krueger
No Further Remedial Action Planned Gary Krueger
(651) 296-6139
(3)
(4)
(7/8)
(9)
(10)
(11)
(651) 296-6139
(651) 296-8374
(651) 297-5177
(651) 296-7291
(651) 296-6139
(651) 296-6139
Large Quantity Generators - refer to contact name on the generator report,
For information about agricultural chemical contamination, please contact Charles Tyler of the Minnesota
Department of Agriculture (651) 297-3997.
Ms, Carissa Schively
Page Five
.
This letter does not constitute an assurance on the part of the MPCA or the state of Minnesota that the
property in question is free of any hazardous substances, pollutants, contaminants, or other eonditions
which may adversely affect the public health, welfare, or the environment.
Please be aware that the information in this letter is provided pursuant to the Minnesota Data Practices
Act, Minn, Stat. ch, 13 and is not intended to relieve from liability any persons who may otherwise be
liable under any provision of state or federal law or regulation, Nor is this letter intended to relieve any
persons from responsibility they may have to investigate property prior to becoming involved in a
transaction relating to that property. Lastly, you should be aware that the absence of information on a
particular parcel of property does not necessarily mean that there are no problems connected with this
property,
Minn. Stat. S lI5B.17, subd. 14 (1992) requires that a person requesting this assistance pay the MPCA's
cost of providing the assistance. The charge for this file evaluation is $115,00, which includes two hours
spent by staff at a rate of $57,50 per hour, A bill for this and any other assistance provided this month
will be mailed to you at the end ofthe month,
If you have any questions regarding this letter or if you would like to review our files, please contact me
at (651) 297-1796,
e
Sincere1~, t t'~ "
/) I/. '
~.}. rvU
Carole J, Nelson
State Programs Administrator - Property
Operation and Planning Section
Metro District
CJN:sjs
Enclosures
.
e
~
e::E
iZl
.2
"'0
~
(1)
......
~
......
.
~
C
::J
o
U
>-
Q)
en
E
cu
0::
... '" :;:'
~...s: .9
~-t~
r~ ~ "'.....
v "'.....
~~~lr)
I:.'J~-lr)
~ -e .:; ~
'- \'.l "".:;s
::l ;:1%
CQ ~~..t:"'
6'~~;;:
;: '" .....
~.,:;i:s:::;:
\'.l"'''''~
r... .!2"'" ...
v ""-0 o.!.-..::
c
"
!;\,
<
C
.s "'"
"
U3 "
u 0 i>
~ .s ~ ~
> U3 2
U3 ~
... . II
z<
g
.
~
..:
~
"
.
D
.
.
o
.
"
g
is
u
.g
.E
~
S
iii
g
"
~
11
~
~
~
-..::
p
'"
~
~
" )t""
:. '/
, : ,,'
. . ."
: j,'/
, ' '
, , ,
" .
; .~ / i r - "
;z
0'
0:
1:.
z:
::I'
0,
....,
. --"-
/
/
//
- --.-----,. '''-'''''' ' ,
- _\~
.It
~
~
:/-
/-
.
,
LONG LAK~
~
~
rJ:J
~'
......
"d
~
(])
.......
~
~
........
~
rJJ.
B
Go
s:: "
1>1,
.... '" <::> -
~ -S '-t: "l
l::~'->"'"
>- '" <::> ~....,
+-' u........'" <) u
C ~~~lr) "
~ .t:: z< ,9
:J "'<:ll::~ U"J i;}
~ -e '- ,]
0 f-< ... '0
:t ._ ~ ":t- ~ g
() ;;j ;:! ~ . U"J 0 '"
"l:3 g ~ S
~I~ '"
>- ~ ~~~':';::: ~
. ~
Q) st:l~::t: I . '"
p ~ "
C/) E "
~~t=: l:: . ::E
.
E '" o!i
2- ~'tl.t')~ ~
ro .... <:l~"" .... t:
c::: 0... C,J >-!.,~
~
(/'1/
/~ /, ,,'
/~, "/,""
/~ i./ . ,._,_'
.-/ //-
.-/ .-J-:'-'
~~/~/ .---- ---/
/~ ---"
/~ ------
;
/ .----
/- ----
.....>'
/.
J!f"
//
! ,,/>"
<>>",
. ~ ,"
. .
.,
!//
. ./:" i,.'/
/"\.
.. ,
/
"
/
/
/
/
"
.,
,
\ i
\i
/.. -
"'/' ,
.
/
\
\
e
"
'.
: .....>~-~aNnOH
/.......... .J.",..,.....,>,..,."",,-.,
,;c~:;~:O:::-~:~~~~~.~~=--_____--
~.
fr';
-i'z / /:1:'.'\ \,
... /, \, '.
l'? /- '.... , '. ..
. / / / ''''c':- ... 'l., ClI
..../ / I 'V""" \ po.
<t>\>",;S>~i' ..
"'<.( '" \'~,
'\ ,,", ! W
<,/ ':~(-"'7/c(
'../ 0
\-;',.:i
-"0/
.
...1 -
~~
" .--.-'-',.:.
---<.
-. -. -., --_ . - -. -L,~~?:::::::.
<4 ---.
"'-.,--.--
'\0
:--.-
.
I
m.:.___.__.....-
.
.... ... \~
"
I I
~,
.
'''"
:....'lI-
-
:z:
I-i
--Ill,
--- i
-
e
e
.
II
11 /,,/,BNj}/ X
p
MINNESOTA HISTORICAL SOCIETY
Sf ATE HISTORIC PRESERV A nON OFFICE
February 12, 2001
Ms, Elizabeth Blodgett
Dahlgren Shardlow & Uban
300 First Avenue North, Suite 210
Minneapolis, MN 55401
RE: Gateway Business Center Project
T30 R23 S21, Arden Hills, Ramsey County
SHPO Number: 2001-0838
Dear Ms, Blodgett:
Thank you for consulting with our office during the preparation of an Environmental Assessment
Worksheet for the above referenced project.
Based on our review of the project information, we conclude that there are no properties listed
on the National or State Registers of Historic Places, and no known or suspected
archaeological properties in the area that will be affected by this project.
Please note that this comment letter does not address the requirements of Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and 36CFR800, Procedures of the Advisory Council
on Historic Preservation for the protection of historic properties, If this project is considered for
federal assistance, or requires a federal permit or license, it should be submitted to our office
with reference to the assisting federal agency,
Please contact us at (651) 296-5462 if you have any questions regarding our comments on this
project.
Sincerely,
~D~;~-roJ
o Government Programs and Compliance Officer
345 KELLOGG BOULEVARD WEST f SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55102-1906 f TELEPHONK 651-296-6126
ItI'I'EPP \)G E.-I
Phase 1 EA - Morris Communications Site
NE Ouadrant of 694 & 35W. Arden Hills. MN
January 4, 2001
page 1
1.0 Executive Summary .
This Phase I Environmental Assessment was prepared by JLM Environmental,
Inc, (JIM) at theTequest of Chesapeake Companies NLP Group (Chesapeake) for
t4e property known as the Morris Communieations Site, hereafter referred to as
the Site, The Site is located at the northeast quadrant of the Highway 694 and
Highway 35W interchange in Arden Hills, Ramsey County, Minnesota, This
Phase I Environmental Assessment (EA) was performed in accordanee with
ASTM EI527-00 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process Guidelines.
Historieal records from the 1880s through the 1990s indieate the Site has been
undeveloped, then cultivated agrieultural iand, then pastureland, An underground
sanitary sewer intereeptor line was present for many years on the Site and was
relocated off-Site in 1998, A buried natural gas pipeline is present on the Site and
it was abandoned in-plaee in 1995, The majority of the Site has been leased as
horse pasture for several years,
Surrounding property use has included a rendering plant that was located just
north of the Site for many years, The City of Arden Hills took control of this
property in approximately 1990 and limited environmental investigation was
completed to assess potential impaets from the plant, Based on environmental
reports reviewed by JLM, no significant soil or groundwater impacts were
identified at the plant that would be expected to impact the Site, An abandoned .
railroad spur line that servieed the rendering plant remains adjaeent to portions of
the northern boundary of the Site,
Three or four large eireular stru.ctures were located adjacent to the north of the
Site in the 1950s, This is the current loeation of the A TS Steel building, The use
of these structures is unknown but eould have been storage tanks, holding pens or
impoundments associated with the rendering plant, JLM found no other
information regarding these' structures,
A long-time Site oecupant who uses the Site to pasture horses stated that buried
items were encountered during redevelopment of the ATS property, Attempts by
JLM to determined exaetly what was encountered were unsuceessful,
The ATS building is currently used for warehousing and steel manufaeturing, The
hazardous wastes generated at the ATS Steel facility over the past 10 years included
waste paint, used oil and filters and degreasing solvents, Review of the Ramsey ,
County hazardous waste inspection file for the A TS facility identified no hazardous
waste storage or disposal problems or violations, Based on the past presence of the
cireular structures and history of hazardous waste generation at the ATS Steel
faeility, there is potential that soil or groundwater at the ATS property has been
adversely impaeted, Because the ATS property is adjacent to and at an assumed
upgradient Ioeation., there is potential for impacts to soil or groundwater at the .
Site.
/tPl'hlDf)< tE-L
Phase lEA - Morris Communications Sile
NE Quadrant of 694 & 35W. Arden Hills, MN
January 4,200]
, D,ure2
e
Geotechnieal soil borings were eompleted at the Site in the fall of 2000, In one
boring 12 feet of fill eomprised of sand and einders was identified. The souree of
the einders in the fill is unknown and represents a potential souree of
contamination.
Two groundwater monitoring wells are present' on the northwest portion of the
Site, These wells are part of a large groundwater monitoring network associated
with the' former Twin Cities Army Ammunition Plant' (TCAAP), located
approximately 0,75 mile to the northeast of the Site,' The two on-Site wells were
completed in two separate aquifers, Review of analytical data on water samples
eollected from these wells indieates that ,groundwater on the western edge of the
Site was impaeted in the past with volatile organic compounds (VOCs),
representing a historieal reeognized environmental condition, However,
eontamination has not been deteeted in these wells for several years, A
groundwater pump and treat system continues to operation at the TCAAP faeility
to remediate contaminated groundwater and eontain the contamination plumes
that extend beyond the borders of the TCAAP faeility,
e
During the Site visit, debris and other items present on the ground surface of the
Site included disearded metal piping and other metal equipment, brush, furniture,
wood pallets, a small abandoned camping trailer, a wooden feed dispenser, plastie
water and feed eontainers and discarded canvas signs, A small quantity of
insulated wallboard with a tarpaper layer was observed on the ground in the
northwest comer of the Site, The tarpaper layer may contain asbestos,
Based on review of the regulatory database information, several facilities in the
Site area have been the source of soil and/or groundwater contamination, Based
on their distanee and/or loeation with respect to assumed groundwater flow
direction, impacts at the Site from these doeumented releases, if any, are not
expeeted to exeeed regulated levels.
Review of a 1989 Phase I EA for the rendering plant property reported an old
dump on the western portion of the Site, However, current information from the
MPCA identifies this dump to be loeated approximately 0,75 mile
north/northwest of the Site on the opposite side of the freeway, Aerial
photographs dating baek to 1937 show no evidence of dumping activities on the
Site, The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) was contaeted in an
attempt to verifY the location of the dump, Since this information was not
available at the time this report was issued, an addendum letter will be prepared
by JLM after receipt of the MnDOT response,
e
Ar,PMp/Ji. E -J
Phase 1 EA - Morris Connnunications Site
NE Quadrant of 694 & 35W. Arden Hilk MN
January 4,2001
vage 3
Based on the research condueted fDr this' Phase I EA, no, recognized .-
environmental eonditions were identified for the Site with the exeeption of the ..
following:
. Buried items may have been encountered during development of the ATS
Steel building located adjacent to the north of the Site, Large circular
struetnres possibly associated with the former rendering plant were present in
the 1950s at this location. Hazardous wastes have been generated at this
faeility for at least the past ten years, Based on the historical uses of the ATS
Steel property, there is a potential for subsurface eontamination at the Site,
. A geoteehnieal soil boring eompleted at the Site identified fill that included
cinders, This souree of this fill material is unknown and eould represent a
potential souree of eontamiiJation,
Issues noted for the Site that are not recognized environmental conditions as
defined by the ASTM standard are as follows,
. Two groundwater monitoring wells that are part of a large groundwater
monitoring network associated with the former Twin Cities Army
Ammunition Plant (TCAAP) are loeated on the Site, The wells will likely be
required to remain in-plaee to continue monitoring operations, The loeation .-
of the wells may impact Site development plans, ..
. Review of data on water samples eollected from the TCAAP monitoring wells
indieates that groundwater on the western edge of the Site was impacted in the
past with volatile organie eompounds (VOCs), representing a historical
recognized environmental condition_ Beeause contamination has not been
detected in these wells for several years, and because a groundwater pump and
treat system eontinues to operate at the TCAAP faeility, this is not considered
a current recognized environmental eondition for the Site,
. Insulated wallboard with a tarpaper layer that may contain asbestos was
observed on the ground surfaee on the northwest comer of the Site.
. A 1989 report stated that an old dump was loeation on the western portion of
the Site, Historieal aerial photographs and eurrent information from the
MPCA indicate the Site was not the dump location, An addendum letter will
be issued after reeeipt of information from MnDOT regarding the dump
loeation,
e
ItfIH)lJPJ}t E-,/
Phase lEA ~ Morris COmmunicationS Site
NE Quadrant of 694 & 35W, Arden HiUs, MN
January 4, 200 l
mtue4
e
Based on the eonclusions of this Phase I EA. JLM Environmental, Inc.
recommends the following,
. If it is neeessary to verif'y whether or not historieal uses of the ATS Steel
property have impaeted subsurface eonditions at the Site, a subsurface
investigation would be required,
. If it is neeessary to verif'y whether or not the fill material with einders has
elevated coneentrations of metals or other possible eontaminants, chemical
analysis of the fill would be required,
. Site development plans should take into account the presenee of the two
groundwater monitoring wells that may be required to remain in-plaee for
several years.
. The insulated wallboard should be tested to determine if the tarpaper layer
eontains asbestos, If asbestos-eontaining this material should be properly
disposed of at facility lieensed to aecept asbestos waste.
.
e
A I'I'.EWD r~ f= -,'
AET No, 03-00944- Page 5
.
RESULTS
Soil Boring Lithology
Soil boring logs, including field observations, are presented in Appendix B,
Soil within the soil borings consisted of up to 12 feet of fill (silty sand) underlain by sandy clay.
Field Results
The following results were noted during Pill screening of the soil:
. No concentrations of organic vapors were detected by the PID, except for a very low
detection of 1.5 ppm in the 2-4' soil sample in boring GP-2,
. Groundwater was noted in all three borings from 3' to 5' below grade,
. Fill soils were noted throughout GP-I (12') and at a depth of 6' in GP-2 and GP-3.
e
These results are also presented on the soil boring logs in Appendix B,
Soil Analytical Results
Laboratory analysis of soil samples collected are summarized below and are shown on Table I,
Appendix C contains the Legend report,
. DRO analysis of soil from GP-I (2-4'), GP-I (12') and GP-3 (2-4') showed
concentrations of 16 ppm, 110 ppm and 170 ppm, respectively, The DRO levels noted
were all identified by the laboratory as being atypical of petroleum products, The
chromatograms for these samples are attached to the Legend report,
. Analysis of soil from GP-I (12'), GP-2 (2-4'), GP-2 (7-8') and GP-3 (7-8') revealed no
coneentrations of DRO above the laboratory detection level.
.
e
.
e
!\P/'fN01Y. r-~
AET No, 03-00944- Page 6
.
PAH analysis of soil from GP-l (2-4'), GP-l (12') and GP-3 (2-4') revealed low
concentrations of several PAR compounds.
PAH concentrations were not detected in the soil samples from GP-2 (2-4'), GP-2
(12'),and GP-3 (7-8'),
.
Groundwater Analytical Results
Groundwater samples were collected from GP-l, GP-2 and GP-3, A summary of groundwater
analysis fIndings is listed below and shown on Table 2, Appendix C contains the Legend report,
. DRO analysis of groundwater from GP-2 showed a concentration of 320 parts per billion
(Ppb) , No concentrations of DRO above the laboratory deteetion level were noted in
groundwater collected form GP-l and GP-3, The DRO noted within the groundwater
of GP-2 was noted by the laboratory as being atypical of petroleum products, The
chromatogram for this sample is attached to Legend's report.
. No PAR concentrations were detected in the groundwater samples submitted for
analysis.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
The results of this Limited Soil/Groundwater Assessment reveal the following conclusions:
. Low eoncentrations of DRO and PAR contaminated soil exists within the fill soils of
GP-l and GP-3, and DRO was noted within the surficial groundwater of GP-2.
. Since DRO coneentrations were noted by the laboratory as atypieal of petroleum
products, it is likely the DRO concentrations are due to the existenee of PAR
contaminants.
. The PAR concentrations noted within fill soils from GP-l and GP-3 are eonsidered low
and are below MPCA established Tier 2 (Industrial) Soil Reference Values (SRVs).
/'
It f/~^, p \'1( F -3
AET No, 03-00944 - Page 7
.
. Since P AH concentrations were not detected within the groundwater of all three borings,
the P AHs noted in the fill soils do not appear to be leaching,
RECOMMENDATIONS
. Based on the DRO and P AH concentrations detected, the PROPERTY owner is obligated
to report a release to the MPCA by telephoning the State Duty Officer at 800-422-0798,
. A "No Association Letter" should be obtained through the Minnesota Pollution Control
Ageney's (MPCA's) Volunteer Investigation and Clean-up (VIe) Program.
CLOSURE
The services performed by American Engineering Testing, Ine, for this project have been
conducted in a marmer consistent with that level of skill and eare ordinarily exercised by other
members of the profession currently practicing in this area, under similar budgetary and time
eonstraints,
e
If conditions differing from our original findings are identified, AET should be immediately
contacted to review these conditions and determine if there are any material impacts on any of our
opinions and recommendations.
Report Prepared By:
Report Reviewed By:
}'1
/
i ,!vY-,\
,'ro, " HMMY
. ental SCientrJ
e
Richard'D, Lowe
Environmental Engineer
e
e
e
t111'&/J/x H-I
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION
AND REVIEW
FOR
GATEWAY BUSINESS CENTER
35W /694
ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA
AET #01-00578
SUMMARY
Purpose
It is proposed to construct the three building Gateway Business Center at the NE quadrant of
35W/694 in Arden Hills, Minnesota. The purpose of our work on this project is to explore
subsurface eonditions and provide preliminary geotechnical engineering reeommendations to assist
you and the projeet team in planning, design, and construetion.
Scope
To accomplish the above purpose, you have authorized our finn to drill twelve (12) test borings
at the site, condnct laboratory testing, and prepare this geotechnical engineering report.
Findings
The test borings indicate a generalized soil profile of I' to 14' of fill, topsoil and swamp deposits,
underlain by glacial till and alluvial soils. Ground water was present at some of the borings at
depths varying from about 7' to II'h' below existing site grade.
Recommendations
These reeommendations are eondensed for your convenience. Study our entire report for detailed
recommendations.
.
.
Th~ proposed office buildings can be supported on spread footing foundations ,designed for
an allowable bearing pressure of 3,000 psf to 4,000 psf after soil correction.
The ~ilJ:orreetion should include removing the surfieial fill, topsoil, swamp deposits, and
softer (N,;5 bpf) clayey soils.
The floor slab can be su rted on ade after erforming the soil eorrection.
AlternatIve y, e proposed five story office building can be support on a pile
foundation, if foundations designed for a 4,000 psf bearing pressure are not practical.
Perimeter draintile shonld be installed around below grade building space.
Pavements can be supported on the non-organie site soils after surface compaction and
pJaeement of compacted fiIJ to reattain plan grade. Soils which become unstable during the
.
.
.
.
.
11'l'ENb 1)( 1I.:z.....
AET #01-00578 - Page 2
surface compaction should be subcut and replaeed with better quality material to reattain
grade.
. PIaeement of a l' thiek sand layer in the upper portion of the subgrade can improve
pavement performance, The pavement should be designed for an R-value of 10 if the on-
site soils are utilized for subgrade. If a )' thiek sand layer is placed in the upper portion
of the subgrade, the pavement ean be designed for an R-value of 20.
e
.
.
.41'1'&#,0 I)C r
-::t'
.
Proposed Development Area
Northeast 1-35W and 1-694
Prepared for
Sunde Engineering, Inc.
Wetland Delineation Report
e
Arden Hills, Minnesota
SEH No. A-SUNDE0001.00
December 1999
e
"=SeJ
Proposed Development Area
Northeast 1-35W and 1-694
Wetland Delineation Report
Arden Hills, Minnesota
e
SEH No. A-SUNDE0001.00
December 1999
The procedures described in this report and the field methods used constitute
an official wetlaiJ.d delineation in accordance with the 1987 U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. ,
The field delineation was eompleted by Mr. Wayne E. Jaeobson, P.S.S.,
P.W.S. The delineation is based upon the hydrie soils assessment procedure
of the Routine On-site Determination Method as described in the 1987
Manual. The methodology meets the standards and criteria described in the
manual and eonforms to the applieable standards and regulations in force at
the time the field work was completed. The results refleet eonditions present
at the time of the delineation.
e
1 hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct
supervision.
Prepared by: ~ e.. ~ )z.j~,m
Date
P.S.S. Re~. No.:30611 P.w.S. Reg. No.1000
,'/" .~' / ,/
Reviewed by: 4b1 ", ~/,;, tF"'/
, / (
P.W.S. Reg. No. 17&
Id/J{)/77
,
Date
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
3535 Vadnais Center Drive
200 SEH Center
St. Paul, Minnesota 55110
(612) 490-2000
.
e
.
e
~seJ
3535 VADNAIS CENTER DRIVE, 200 SEH CENTER, ST. PAUL, MN 55110 651 490-2CXXJ 800 325-2055
ARCHITECTURE ENGINEERING ENVIRONMENTAL TRANSPORTATION
Deeember 20, 1999
RE: Northeast 1-35W and 1-694
Proposed Development Area
Wetland Delineation Report
A-SUNDEOOO1.00
Mr. Brian Mundstoek
Sunde Engineering, me.
4200 West Old Shakopee Road
Suite 230
Bloomington, MN 55437-2967
Dear Mr. Mundstoek:
Attached is the Wetland Delineation Report for the property loeated northeast ofI-35W and 1-694
in Arden Hills, Minnesota. The report presents the results of the field delineation performed on
November 18-19, 1999. The field delineation identified eight wetland basins,
Projects that will result in direct or indirect impacts to wetlands may require permits from the U.S.
Anny Corps of Engineers or the Local Government Unit administering the Wetland Conservation Act
in the project area.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide wetland serviees for Sunde Engineering. If you have any
questions with regard to this delineation or permits that may be required for the proposed projeet,
please contact me at (651) 490-2146. .
Sineerely,
Kelly A Bettendorf, P.W.S.
Project Manager
Attachment
SHORT EWOTT
HENDRICKSON INe
MINNEAPOLfS, MN
CHIPPEWA FALLS. WI
MADISON, WI
LAKE COUNTY, IN
ST. CLOUD, MN
EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
Table of Contents
Certification Page
Letter of Transmittal
Table of Contents
Page
Introduction .............................................................. ................................................ 1
Site Descri ption ........................................................................................................ 1
Wetland Del ineatlon .................................................................. ............................... 1
Wetlands Definition......,.,........................................................................................... 1
Methodology..............................................................................................................2
Wetlands Survey .......................................................:................................................2
Field Procedures..................................................................................................... ....2
Wetland Classification.................. .;............................................................................ 3
Re suits .... ............................. ................................ ..... .... . .... ........ ...... ........ ............ ..... 3
Reg ulatory Co nsi de rations .... ...... ....................... ........... ........ ................................. 3
Wetland Functions and Values ............................................................................... 4
Wetland Functions.............,..................................... ............... ....................................4
Wetland Values ........................................... ................. ....,... .....................................,4
Bib Ii 0 g rap hy ............. ........... ......... ......... ......... .... ..... ............ ................... .................. 6
Sunde Engineering, Inc,
Arden Hills, Minnesota
A-SUNDE0001,OO
Pagei
.
e
e
e
e
e
Figure 1
Site Loeation Map
Figure 2
National Wetland Inventory Map
Figure 3
Soils Map
Figure 4
Wetland Basins
Table 1
Wetland Basin Characteristics
Appendix A
RODM Data Sheets
List of Figures
List of Tables
List of Appendices
Appendix B
Climatology Data (October-November 1999)
Sunde Engineering, Ine,
Arden Hills, Minnesota
A-SUNDEOOO1.00
Page;
December 1999
e
Wetland Delineation Report
Sunde Engineering, Inc.
Northeast of 1-35W and 1-694
Proposed Development Area
Arden Hills, Minnesota
Introduction
The purpose of this study was to investigate the project area, identify areas
meeting the technical criteria for wetlands, delineate the jurisdictional
extent of the wetland basins and classify the wetland habitat. This field
delineation will be the basis on which wetland impaets from the proposed
project will be determined.
This report describes the methodology and results of the field delineation a
performed on November 18-19, 1999. Figures referred to in the text are .,
included at the end of the report.
Site Description
The project site is loeated in the SW'A of Section 21 in Township 30 North,
Range 23 West in Ramsey County, Minnesota as shown on Figure 1. The
site is bounded on the north by IndustriaI Development, on the east by
horse pasture, on the west by 1-35W, and on the south by 1-694.
Wetland Delineation
Wetlands Definition
Wetlands are defined in the Federal Register (1982) as "areas that are
inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequeney and
duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do
support, a prevalenee of vegetation typieally adapted for life in saturated
soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and
similar areas."
e
A-SUNDE0001,OO
Page 1
e
e
e
Wetlands have three elements that must be present in order for the area
to be defined as a wetland as follows:
1. Greater than 50 pereent dominance of hydrophytic plant species.
2. A hydric soil substrate.
3. Wetland hydrology during the growing season.
Methodology
Wetlands Survey
Topographic maps, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serviee National Wetland
Inventory (NWI) map, the Soil Survey for Washington and Ramsey
Counties, the Ramsey County hydric soils list and the Minnesota
Department of Natural Resources Protected Waters Inventory (PWI) map
were reviewed prior to visiting the site to loeate potential wetland
habitats. Figure 2 is a eopy of the NWI map and Figure 3 is a copy of the
soils map for the projeet area. These sources showed wetland areas that
were investigated in greater detail during the field delineation.
Field Procedures
The project site was examined on November 18-19, 1999 for areas meeting
wetland criteria in aecordanee with the Corps of Engineers Wetland
Delineation Manual (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1987). The 1987
Manual requires that soil inundation or saturation occurs within 18 inches
of the surfaee and that all three wetland parameters be present.
The Routine Oru;ite Determination Method (RODM) was applied.for this
delineation. Field notes, samples and photographs were taken at
representative loeatioru; in each wetland basin. Collected information was
transferred to RODM data sheets included in Appendix A Photographs
will be retained on file at SEH, Ine.
Wetland plant species nomenclature follows the National List (U.S.
Department of the Interior, 1988). Identifieation was aided when
neeessary with field guides for the region.
Soils were observed for hydrie soil charaeteristies. Soils were examined
in cores taken with a Model A Oakfield sampler. Cores were taken to a
depth necessary to confirm hydric soil characteristics, up to a maximum
depth of 24 inches, Soil color determinations were made using
MUNSELL Soil Color Charts (Kollmorgen Iru;truments Corporation,
1992). Site soil characteristics were compared to those mapped and
described in the Soil Survey for Washington and Ramsey Connties.
Subsurface wetland hydrology indieators were examined using the soil
cores and/or soil pits as deep as 18 inches to confirm soil saturation,
Sunde Engineering, Inc
Arden Hiils, Minnesota
A-SUNDE0001,OO
Page 2
Wetland boundaries were located and marked with sequentially-numbered,
30 ineh pin flags printed with 'WETLAND DELINEATION" to allow ..
for surveying and mapping, The wetland edge is considered the highest ..
extent of the wetland basin; areas above the boundary fail to meet the
three required wetland parameters while areas below the edge meet the
wetland parameters required by the field delineation methodology.
Sample points were established at representative Ioeations on each basin.
The data eollected at each sample point is included on the data sheets in
Appendix A The sample points bear the number of the nearest wetland
flag. A sample point on the upland side of the boundary ends in a "U", and
a sample point on the wetland side of the boundary ends in a "W". The
loeation of the delineated wetland boundaries were surveyed and mapped
by using a Trimble Pathfinder Pro XRS OPS Mapping System. The results
of the delineation are shown on Figure 4.
Wetland Classification
Classification of each wetland basin is included on the RODM data sheets
in Appendix A Wetland classification follows the methods described in
Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin, et. ai,
1979) and used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetland
Inventory. The Circular 39 classification (Shaw and Fredine, 1956) is also
provided.
e
Results
The field delineation was eonducted under temperature and preeipitation
eonditions that were slightly below normal as compared to the historical
average for the region. Oimatology data is included in Appendix B for the
East Central District of Minnesota. Most of the vegetation was
identifiable, including all dominant species.
Eight wetland basins were identified, delineated and classified. The
RODM Data Forms indicate the dominant speeies of vegetation and the
soil and hydrologic characteristics at representative locations around the
basin. Table 1 is a summary of the classification of the wetland basins.
Table 1
Wetland Characteristics
Basin Cowardin Circular 39
ID Classification Classification
1 PUBOx Municipal
2 PEMB Type 2
3 PEMC Type 2/3
e
Sunde Engineering, Inc
Arden HUIs, Minnesota
A-5UNDEOO01,OO
Page 3
.
.
.
Basin Cowardin Circular 39
ID Classification Classification
4 PEMC Type 3
5 PEMC Type 2/3
6 PEMC Type 3
7 PEMF Type 4
8 PEMC Type 3
Regulatory Considerations
Wetlands in the project area are regulated by several agencies at the loeal,
regional, state and federal levels including the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (ACOE) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EP A)
at the federal level; the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources
(BWSR),and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR),
and the Minnesota Pollution Control Ageney (MPCA) at the state level;
and the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) at the local level. The
RCWD has aeeepted the responsibility for the administration of the
Wetland Conservation Act.
Construction plans that propose any direct alteration or indirect impacts
to wetlands or watercourses within the projeet area will require permits
from the appropriate regulatory agencies. Violation of wetland regulations
ean result in substantial civil and/or eriminal penalties.
Wetland Functions and Values.
When wetlands will be impacted by a project, the importance of the
wetland functions should be analyzed for societal and ecological values.
Although it is beyond the scope of this investigation to assess the
functions and values associated with the wetlands identified in this
delineation, the fonowing discussion is provided to assist in the assessment
of project impacts to wetlands.
Wetland functions are defined as natural processes that occur in wetlands.
Wetland values are typically subjective benefits that are realized to society
through the natural processes that occur to a different extent in various
wetland types.
Sunde Engineering, Inc
Arden Hills. Minnesota
A-SUNDE0001.00
Page 4
Wetland functions and their corresponding values are defined by
Richardson (1994) as follows:
Wetland Functions
A) Hydrologic flux and storage
B) Biologieal productivity
C) Biogeochemical cycling and storage
D) Decomposition
E) Wildlife habitat
Wetland Values
I) Flood control (A, B)
2) Sediment control (B, C)
3) Wastewater treatment (B, C)
4) Nutrient removal (B, C)
5) Recreation (A, E)
6) Open spaee (A, B, E)
7) Aesthetics (A, E)
8) Hunting and trapping (B, E)
9) Plant and animal refuges (E)
10) Timber production (A, B)
11) Shrub crops (cranberry) (A, B)
12) Edueation and researeh (A, B, C, D, E)
13) Erosion control (A, B, C)
14) Food production (B, E)
15) Historieal and archeological resources (B)
16) 1breatened and endangered speeies habitat (E)
17) Water quality (A, C)
18) Water supply (A)
e
e
e
Sunde Engineering, Inc
Arden Hills, Minnesota
A-SUNDEOO01.00
Page 5
e
e
'e
Methods for the determination of wetland functions and values vary but
should consider those listed above. Published methods on wetland
functions and value determination (ie. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(1988) and Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources (1997) are
biased toward certain wetland types. This should be considered when
choosing the type of method suitable for the particular landscape and
wetlands identified in this study.
Sunde Engineering, Inc
Arden HRIs, Minnesota
A.SUNDE0001.00
Page 6
Bibliography
Bigham, 1.M. and Ciolkosz, E.J., 1993. Soil Color. SSSA Special Publication 31. Soil Science Society ..
of America, Inc. Madison, Wisconsin. ..
Brown, Lauren, 1979. Grasses: An Identification Guide. Houghton Mifflin Company, New York.
Eggers, S.D. and D.M. Reed, 1997. Wetland Plants and Plant Communities of Minnesota and Wisconsin.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District, St. Paul, Minnesota
Knobel, E., 1980. Field Guide to the Grasses, Sedges and Rushes of the United States. Dover
Publications.
Kollmorgen Instruments Corporation, 1992. MUNSELL SOIL COLOR CHARTS. Macbeth Division
of Kollmorgen Instruments Corporation, Newburgh, New York.
Little, E.L, 1980. The Audubon Society Field Guide to North American Trees - Eastern Region. Alfred
A Knopft, Inc.
Minnesota Board of Water & Soil Resources, 1997. Minnesota Routine Assessment Method for
Evaluating Wetland Functions (MNRAM).
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Protected Waters Inventory Map, Ramsey County, 1985.
Scale: I" = 5,280'.
Moyle, J.V. and E.W. Moyle, 1977. Northland Wild Flowers - A Guide for the Minnesota Region. e
University of Minnesota Press.
Newcomb, L, 1977. Newcomb's Wildflower Guide. Little, Brown and Company.
Richardson, C.l., 1994. Ecological Functions and Human Values in Wetlands. Wetlands, Vol. 14, No.
1:1-9.
Shaw, S.P. and C.G. Fredine, 1956. Wetlands of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Circular 39. 67 pp.
Soil Survey for Washington and Ramsey Counties, Minnesota United States Department of Agriculture,
Soil Conservation Service, 1980. Scale: I" ;, 1,320'.
Tryon, R., 1980. Ferns of Minnesota. University of Minnesota Press.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual Technical Report
Y-87-1. Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1988. Wetland Evaluation Methodology for the North Central United
States. 97 pp. plus appendices.
U.S. Department of Agriculture" Soil Conservation Service, 1991. Hydric Soils of the United States. In
cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils. USDA-SCS, Washington, D.C.
.
Sudne Engineering, Inc
Arden HUIs, Minnesota
A-SUNDE0001.00
Page 7
U.S. Department of Agriculture - Soil Conservation Service, 1994. Keys to Soil Taxonomy. Pocahonta~
_press, Inc., Blacksburg, Virginia.
U.S. Department of Agriculture - Soil Conservation Service, 1992. Midwestern Wetland Flora: Field
Office Guide to Plant Species. Midwest National Technical Center, Lincolo, Nebraska
U.S. Department of the Interior, 1988. National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: North
Central (Region 3). Biological Report 88 (26.3), Fish and Wildlife Service. In cooperation with the
National and Regional Interagency Review Panels. Washington, D.C.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetland Inventory Map, New Brighton, Minnesota Quadrangle,
1991. (From 1980 aerial photographs.) Scale: 1" = 2,000'.
U.S. Geological Survey 7.5' Quadraogle Map, New Brighton, Minnesota Quadrangle. Scale: 1" = 2,000'.
Vepraskas, M.J., 1994. Redoximorphic Features for Identifying Aquic Conditions. Technical Bulletin
301. North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina.
_
.
Sudne Englneerlng, Inc
Arden Hills, Minnesota
A-SUNDE0001.00
Page B
~~~.'~.(..../,:;,,:/~llrl.~ ~f1&h,j.-.',J ,/i//~\\,' 1\(t?7~~~ ~ ~
~1 ~l~' ~\ I ~\~O " ~ ~__ .\1;-VY:~ ~ &lit:
:::" :"10<><;' ~v s,,'V 1 ;;. ~'~J;,)p':;\'\r!~\"~ 4~~
, .., ~t . \ l' .. <., l'w) _, ;. I\: \.
~':;'l \, -~j ',stP'
r~"l-'J'( -.. ,\ ',6 r .~~ ' ~ \0
"'" D. ~. ~" i2~..... c:J11 i.'"" \ .' " II! ~,,~, i,-') __I
. D '. Ii\) '';. =. I' J'J ~ >\~'.: . ).. L 00-.. ".<'=
~ IDI~~ ';-\~.., .:..t oll~" ,\. .~Z_~..:) ~
'" \\~ ,/ .~\ \ V 8 .ffi ~,~~\.~ J,~ ~ \ (f"~CJ1~kr,"~
~r?lffi~I~~~~'1l~ ~~~~? \~, .,,;~~..Em~,:~~j~~~~}1J0A ~~~~
\ rr\:::;\~." . ~lli " '2!'l: \. \'\~ t~:?QIc'J,~:~~rvj);O" lJ If ~
l~ ~~~, "", '-, ~l?J I~ ID:'\~ 'I.~ \J~" ,I I~ r~ ~~~'~lJJ -~
,~ '("<b. ) C' )J, \,::-. ~~ ~.. .' IV: 0/
/ffi ( \ ~ ;.i.. ":',1\ _ ~1;1Jtfj 18~ \ 21 Q-.;, ., - ' rx' T
:/,uI:JJ '0 ~ I ly:1 ~~ ~ 1 .. '"". If. [j (I~
1 " '" <1>.'.' ~. '" ',.'S:"", \)~ -
o Co- I I.' *'\~ ,0
l ,0 .." ~~} (O~~~~.=::. ~~o I=. '.:, :,~. ~.~~.
, " ~o~ ';~ fl "",'r:$:~"M' ,....~~; ~!1
c:: ~:.r;rg.~ _ ' ~T~\... ~~ ~~~r
. G ".i"'-'>'; " I.., . t?'Y.':i'I,,\ ""~~~
. ~~ r . ~,~~~1" .<~ c'~~
,~ " n. ... ..:' ,,~.7 ~~.
: r .. !~..j(:~'c-,-'?~~~~";"@' J..~~
I ~rlj\l'~ 11:'\1 j;'c"11~,.~7~ . ~~~~~I~.. :
. ,.' ~.~'~11t ".' I). '''' .^ ""'.SIQII' ~''''- "
. 7 ~., . :.~\ . "" ~/ ~
\: ..: _ ,j, ..' ~..~..\'! ".r7'; \_,' K; ....~~f.i'.i),,- I]-:~
" " (",~ ~~- . . . ~ I -::::
1~, '. II . ~'I _ ,.: , . ," ~ 0 I t
~c' :\\'.' / \, .~~,,". ' .. 0 ~. ':. .~~- ~. c..;; h.~
,~\\, ~ _Bj\r cr-J1!!p!r .... ~~ ~ ~Ii~:~- .~.' fi. .~
ffl ~ . r. ~~' . I' /.. IF'. '-o-~'~<i: ' ;-c eo.. III :
t8;~~:~ '-:'dr: ' ~ J.' :f?~:;;;;;kS.. [~~fu'~.
/ .".. .~.':~.-. J h --....~'.,';, .~v
,.. d '"' _ ,-~ ,1]i!I' h "=- liil'- . \,
'i: :"'1r:sJ" ~c---.. -....... ~ - Vl N
'" ([ ~~:~ 3 -' ..' . :r~. ~ '\ .'.~ '~j,. '~
~/.e j ~~ 0 ~1. .~ '<l' Ii
W~ Hi ~ ~~~~11~2ft~b\:' \ ,0 ~al\(l'.", ','V' (~[;
~J~ ~ ,0:" rJ ! ~ ?J~ "'c ~- j P~"":j... !'S'I"i~~ . ~~.::::,!~0)JJ~ A ~y
,
11
f' T ;
: :J
~5et
NORTHEAST 1-35W AND 1,694
SUNDE ENGINEERING. INC.
SITE LOCATION MAP
SCALE
"=2000'
CNGINfERS_Maf1FCrs-Pf..ANNrnS
FIGURE NO.
1
e
.
.
N
~
SCALE
1"==2000'
'-'SeJ
NORTHEAST 1-35W AND 1-694
SUNDE ENGINEERING. INC.
NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY MAP
FIGURE NO_
2
fflGINffRS_ARalTfCTs.PLANNERS
~
,
~
,
]~~/,.
/~
<<
'.-"
)'
'"
\.
.~ .. ...
"'SaJ
NORTHEAST 1-35W AND 1-694
SUNDE ENGINEERING. INC,
SOilS MAP
ENG/NCERS_ARCHITCCTSIIPL.ANNlRS
N
~
SCALE
1'=1320'
FIGURE NO.
3
e
ProjectlSite: 1.35W and 1-694 Site Project No: SUNDEOOOl Date: 19.Nov.1999
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineerlng, Inc, County: Ramsey
Investigators: Wayne E. Jacobson. P,S,S" PW,S, State: Minnesota
PlotlD: 2.1U
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? ~ No Community ID: Upland field
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation:)? Yes ~ TransectlD: 2.1U
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes No Field Location:
(II needed, explain on the reverse side)
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
'lECETATIGN
(USFWS-RegklR-N" 3)
_
Dominant Plant SoecleslLatlnICommon\ Stratum Indicator Plant l;lpeclesll1'tin/Co!Jlmon\ S1ratum Indicator
Poa pratensis Herb FAC- T rifol/urn pratense Herb FACU+
Bluegrass,Kentucky Clover,Red
.
Percent 01 Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC: I~AC Neutral: 0/1 =0.00%
(excluding FAC-) 0/2 = 0.00% Numeric Index: 7/2 =3.50
Remarks:
.
HYDROLOGY
NO Recorded Data(Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators
N1A S1ream, Lake "r Tlde Gauge Primary Indicators
N1A Aerial Photographs NO Inundaled
Nt A Other NO Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
YES No Recorded Data NO Water Marks
NO Drift Lines
field Observations NO Sediment Deposits
NO Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth 01 Surface Water: NtA (In.) NO Oxidized Root Channels In Upper 12 Inches
Depth to Free Water in Pit: >16 (In.) NO Water-Stained Leaves
NO Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: > 16 (in.) NO FAG-Neutral Test
NO Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
e
Page 1 of 2
WelForm'"
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: 1.35W and 1-694 Site Project No: SUNDEOOOl
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineering, Inc.
Investigators: Wayne E, Jacobson. P.S.S.. PW.S,
Date: 19,Noy,1999
County: Ramsey
State: Minnesota
Plot ID: 2.tU
e
SOILS
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Urban land-Hayden'Kingsley Complex
Map Symbol: B60C Drainage Class: Wen drained Mapped Hydric Inclusion?
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Typic Hapludall Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type? @ No
Prolile Descrlollon
Depth Matrix Color Motile Color Motile
(Inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Texture, Concretions, S1~ctureJ elc
0-18 A 10YR412 N1A N1A N1A Sandy loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
NO Hlstosol NO Concretions
NO Hlstlc Eplpedon NO High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
NO Sutlldlc Odor . NO Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
NO Aqulc Moisture Regime NO Listed on Local Hydric Soils Ust
NO Reducing Conditions NO Listed on National Hydric Soils List
NO Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors NO O1her (explain In Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Hydric Soils Present?
Remarks:
Yes (No I'
Yes @
Yes (No
. Is the Sampling Polnl within the Wetland? .. Yes Q!V
,
_
e
Page 2 of 2
WetForm'"
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
e
Project/Site: 1-35W and 1-694 Site Project No: SUNDEOOOl Date: 19-Nov-1999
ApplicanVOwner: Sunde Engineering, Jnc, County: Ramsey
Investigators: Wayne E. Jacobson, P.S.S., P.W.S. State: Minnesota
PlotlD: 2.' W
Do Nonnal Circumstances exist on the site? c:;.j) No Community ID: Type 2 Wel Meadow
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation:)? Yes ~ Transect ID: 2-1W
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes No Field location:
(If needed, expiain on the reverse side)
VEGElMIGN
(IJSFWS RegieR No. 3)
_
Dominant Plant Soecles(latlnlCommon} Stratum Indicator Plant soeci\>sllatin/Com(llon} Stratum Indh:atQl'
Eleocharis acicularis Herb OBl Phalaris arundinacea Herb FACW+
Spikerush,leasl Grass, Reed Canary
Typha angus/ifolia Herb OBl
Cattall,Narrow-leaf
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBl, FACWor FAC: I~AC Neu1ral: 3/3 _100,00%
(excluding FAC-) 3/3 = 100.00% Numeric Index: 4/3 = 1.33
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
NO Recorded Data(Describe In Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators
NJ A Stream, lake or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators
NJA Aerial Photographs NO Inundated
N1A Other YES Saturated In Upper 12 Inches
YES No Recorded Data NO Water Marks
NO Drift Lines
Field Observations NO Sediment Deposits
NO Drainage Pallerns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: NJA (in.) NO Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Depth to Free Water in Pit: = 16 (in.) NO Water-Stained leaves
YES local Soli Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soli: = 8 (in.) YES FAC-Neu1ral Test
NO Other (explain In Remarks)
Remarks:
e
Page' of 2
WetFormlm.
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
ProjecVSite: 1-35W and 1-694 Site Project No: SUNDE0001
ApplicanVOwner: Sunde Engineering. Inc.
Investigators: Wayne E, Jacobson. P.S,S., PoW.S.
Date: 19-Nov-1999
County: Ramsey
State: Minnesota
PlotlD: 2-1W
SOilS
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Bluffton loam
Map Symbol: 75 Drainage Class: Very poorly drained Mapped Hydric Inclusion?
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Typic Haplaquolls Field Observalions Confirm Mapped Type? @ No
Profile Description
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Color Mottle
(Inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) AbundancelContras' . Texture, Concretions, Struct.ur.e, etc
0-8 A 10YR3Il 7.5YR4/4 Common Distinct Clay loam
8,16 B 10YR4Il 7.5YR4/6 Common Distinct Clay loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
NO Histosol NO Concretions
NO Hlstic Eplpedon NO High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
NO Sulfidic Odor NO Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
YES Aqulc Moisture Regime YES Listed on local Hydric Soils List
YES Reducing Conditions YES Listed on NationalHydric Soils. List
YES Gleyed or low Chroma Colors NO Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
.-.---
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytlc Vegetation Present?
Weiland Hydrology Present?
Hydric Soils Present?
Remarks:
es No
es No
es No
Is the Sampling Point within the Weiland?
e
Page 2 of 2
WetFormWo
_
.
_
Appendix A
ROOM Data Sheets
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Projec1lSite: 1-35W and 1-694 Sile Project No: SUNDEOOOl
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineering, Inc,
Investigators: Wayne E. Jacobson. P.S,S., P,W.S.
Date: 19-Nov-1999
County: Ramsey
Slate: Minnesota
Plot ID: l-lU
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site?
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation:)?
Is the area a potential Problem Area?
(If needed, explain on Ihe reverse side)
es
Yes
Yes
No
@
@
Community ID:
TransectlD:
Field Location:
Upland field
l-1U
'/ECET!'.TION
(YSF\'IS Regioo-Ne. 3)
Dominant Plant SoeciesfLatinICommon) . Stratum Indicator Pla"t SoeciesfLatln/Commonl Stratum Indicator
Erigeron canadensis Herb UPL Trifolium pratense Herb FACU+
Horseweed Clover,Red
Bromus inermis Herb UPL Pea pratensis Herb FAC-
Brome, Smooth Bluegrass,Kentucky
.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC: IIFAC Neu1ral: 0/3 = 0.00%
(excluding FAC-) 0/4 =0.00% Numeric Index: 17/4 =4.25
Remarks:
,
HYDROLOGY
NO Recorded Data(Describe in Remarks):
N1A Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
N1A Aeriar Photographs .
NI A other
YES No Recorded Data
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water in Pit:
Depth to Saturated Soil:
N/A (in,)
>16 (in.)
> 16 (in.)
Weiland Hydrology Indicators
Primary Indicators
NO Inundated
NO Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
NO Water Marks
NO Drift Lines
NO Sediment Deposits
NO Drainage Patterns in Wellands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
NO Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
NO Water-Stained Leaves
NO Local Soil SUlvey Data
NO FAC-Neutral Test
NO Other (Explain In Remarks)
Field Observations
Remarks:
Page 1012
WetFormR
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: J,35W and 1-694 Site Project No: SUNDE0001
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineering. Inc,
Investigators: Wayne E. Jacobson, P.S.S., PoW,S,
Date: 19-Nov-1999
County: Ramsey
State: Minnesota
PlotlD: l.tV
.
SOILS
Map Un" Name (Series and Phase): Urban land-Hayden-Klngsley Complex
Map Symbol: B60C Drainage Class: Well drained Mapped Hydric Inclusion?
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Typic Hapludalf Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type? @ No
Profile Descrlollon
Depth Matrix Color Mollie Color MOllie
(Inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrasl Texture, C,?ncretlons, S1:ructure, etc ,
0-16 A 10YR312 NJA NJA NJA Sandy loam
Hydric Soil indicators:
NO Histosol NO Concretions
NO Hisllc Epipedon NO High Organic Content in Surface Layer In Sandy Soils
NO Sulfidic Odor NO Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
NO Aqulc Moisture Regime NO Listed on Local Hydric Solis List
NO Reducing Conditions NO Listed on National Hydric Solis List
NO Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors NO Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
.
Hydrophyllc Vegetation Present? Ves ( ~ is Ihe Sampling Point within the Wetland? Yes ~
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ( ~
Hydrlc Soils Present? ' Yes ( No)
Remarks:
.
e
Page 2 of 2
WetFormftl
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
ProjecVSile: 1-35W and 1-694 Site Project No: SUNDEOOOl
ApplicanVOwner: Sunde Engineering, Inc.
Investigators: Wayne E. Jacobson, P.S.S., PW,S,
Date: 19-Nov-1999
County: Ramsey
State: Minnesota
PlotlD: '.lW
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site?
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation:)?
Is the area a potential Problem Area?
(If needed, explain oil the reverse side)
es
Yes
Yes
No
@
@
Community ID:
Transect ID:
Field location:
Constructed Stormwater Pond
HW
"EGET^TION
(I/SEWS Region.tlo..3)
Dominant Plant S"""lesILatlnlCommon) stratum Indicator Plant SoecieslLalinIColI)mon) Stratum Indicator
Cyanobacteria Herb OBl Carex spp, Herb FACW
Blu.;::oreen algae Sedge, unidenlilied
Percent of Dominant Species that are OSL, FACW or FAC: I FAC Neu1ral: 2/2 = 100.00%
(excluding FAC-) 2/2 = 100.00% Numeric Index: 3/2 = 1.50
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
NO Recorded Data(Describe In Remarks): WeIland Hydrology Indicators
NI A Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators
NI A Aerial Photographs YES Inundated
NfA Other YES Saturated In Upper 12 Inches
YES No Recorded Data NO Water Marks
NO Drift Lines
FJeld Observations NO Sediment Deposits
NO Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: = 1 (in.) NO Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Depth to Free Water In Pit: NlA (in.) NO Water-Stained leaves
NO local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: NfA (in.) YES FAC-Neu1ral Test
NO Other (Explain In Remarks)
Remarks:
.
Pagelof2
WetFormlm
e
.
e
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
. (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
ProjecllSite: 1-35W and 1-694 Site Project No: SUNDEOOOl
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineering, Inc.
Investigators: Wayne E, Jacobson, P.S,S" P.W,S,
Date: 19-Nov-1999
County: Ramsey
State: Minnesota
Plot ID: HW
SOilS
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Sluffton loam
Map Symbol: 75 Drainage Class: Very poorly drained Mapped Hydric Inclusion? Yes@
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Typic Haplaquolls Field Observallons Confirm Mapped Type?
Prollle Descrlntlon ,
Depth Matrix Color Monte Color Mollie
(Inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) AbundanceJContrast Texture, Concretions, Structure, etc
0-8 A 5GY5Il N1A N1A N1A Sandy clay
6-18 B 5GY4/1 N1A N1A N1A Sandy clay
Hydric Soil Indicators:
NO Hlstosol NO Concretions
NO Hlstlc Epipedon NO High Organic Content In Surface Layer In Sandy Soils'
NO Suffidic Odor NO Organic Streaking In Sandy Solis
YES Aqulc Moisture Regime YES Listed on local Hydric Soils List
YES Reducing Conditions YES Listed on National Hydric Soils List
YES Gleyed or low Chroma Colors NO Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
, .-,- "---
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? ( ~ No Is the Sampling Point within the Wetland? ,~ No
Wetland Hydrology Presenl? ( es No
Hydric Soils Present? ( es No
Remarks:
Page 2 of 2
WetFormftl
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
ProjecUSile: 1-3SW and 1-694 Site Project No: SUNDEOOOl
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineering, Inc,
Investigators: Wayne E. Jacobson, P,S.S" PoW,S,
Date: 19-Nov-1999
County: Ramsey
State: Minnesota
PlotlD: 3-1U
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site?
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation:)?
Is the area a potential Problem Area?
(If needed, explain on the reverse side)
VCGLTATION
es
Yes
Yes
No
@)
@)
Community ID:
Transec1ID:
Field location:
Upland field
3-1U
Dominant Plant Species(Latln/C9rnmonl Stratum Indicator PlllJlt SpecieS/latin/Common) Stratum Indicator
Erigeron canadensis Herb UPL Poa pratensis Herb FAC-
Horseweed Bluegrass,Kentucky
,
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC: I ~AC Neutral: 011 - 0.00%
(excluding FAC-) 0/2 = 0.00% Numeric Index: 8/2 =4,00
Remarks:
(USFWS-Regi&n-Ne, 3)
HYDROLOGY
NO Recorded Data(Describe In Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Nt A Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Prlma.ry Indicators
NtA Aerial Photographs NO Inundated
~ Other NO Saturated In Upper 12 Inches
YES No Recorded Data NO Waler Marks
NO Drift Lines . ....
NO Sediment Deposits
Field Observations NO Drainage Patiems in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: N/A (in) NO Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Depth to Free Water in Pit: > 18 (in) NO Water-Stained Leaves
NO local Soli Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: > 18 (in) NO FAC-Neutral Test
NO Other (Explain In Remarks)
Remarks:
.
Page 1 of 2
WetFormlm
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: 1.35W and 1-694 Site Project No: SUNDEOOOl
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineering. Inc,
Investigators: Wayne E, Jacobson. P,S,S" P,W,S.
Date: 19-Nov-1999
County: Ramsey
state: Minnesota
PlotlD: 3-1U
.
SOILS
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Hayden fine sandy loam
Map Symbol: 1328 Drainage Class: Well drained Mapped Hydric Inclusion?
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Typic Hapludalfs Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type? @ No
Profile Descrlpllon
Depth Matrix Color Mollie Color Mollie
(Inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) AbundancelContrasl Texture, Concretions, SI(\Ict!,re, etc.
0-16 A 10YR3Il 7.5YR4I4 Common Distinct Sandy loam
, ,
Hydric Soil Indicators:
NO Histosol ... NO Concretions
NO Histic Eplpedon NO High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
NO Sulfidic Odor NO Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
NO Aquic Moisture Regime NO Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
NO Reducing' Conditions NO Listed on National Hydric Soils List
. NO Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors NO Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
e
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Hydric Solis Present?
Remarks:
. Yes (No
Yes @
Yes (No).
Is the Sampling Point within the Wetland?
Yes @
,
.
Page 2 of 2
WetForm'"
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: 1-35W and 1-694 Sile Project No: SUNDEOOOl
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineering, Ine,
Investigators: Wayne E. Jacobson, P.S.S,. PoW,S,
Date: 19-Nov-1999
County: Ramsey
State: Minnesota
PloIID: 3.1W
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site?
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation:)?
Is the area a potential Problem Area?
(II needed, explain on the reverse side)
es
Yes
Yes
No
@
@
Community 10:
Transect 10:
Field location:
Type 2/3 Wet Meadow I Shallow
3-1W
am
.-~-~VEGErATION-
(11~5=W~ ~P9linn Nn ~)
Dominant Plant SP9cieslLatinlCl)mmon) Stratum Indicator Plant $oeclesfLatinlComm':>o) Stratum Indicator
Eleocharis acicu/aris Herb OBl Phalaris arundinacea Herb FACW+
Spikerush,leasl Grass.Reed Canary
Typha anguslifolia Herb OBl
Cattail,Narrow-leal
Percent 01 Dominant Species that are OBl, FACW or FAC: IFAC Neutral: 3/3 _ 100.00%
(excluding FAC-) 3/3 = 100,00% Numeric Index: 4/3 = 1.33
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
NO Recorded Dala(Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators
NI A Stream, lake or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators
N1A Aerial Photographs NO Inundated
NI A Other YES Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
YES No Recorded Data NO Water Marks
NO Drill Lines
Field Observations NO Sediment Deposits
NO Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth 01 Surface Waler: N1A (in.) NO Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Depth to Free Water in Pit: = 12 (in.) NO Water-Stained leaves
YES local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: =6 (in.) YES FAC-Neutral Test
NO Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
.
Page 1 012
WetFormWll
e
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: 1-35W and 1-694 Site Project No: SUNDEOOOl
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineering, Inc.
Invesligators: Wayne E. Jacobson, P,S.S" P.W,S,
Date: 19-Nov,1999
County: Ramsey
State: Minnesota
PlotlD: 3-1W
SOilS
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Blufflon loam
Map Symbol: 75 Drainage Class: Very poorly drained Mapped Hydric Inclusion?
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Typic Haplaquolls Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type? @ No
Profile Description
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Color Mottle
(Inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Texture,.Concretions, structure"etc
0-18 A 10YR3Il N1A N1A N1A Sandy loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
NO Hlstosol NO Concretions
NO Histlc Epipedon NOHigh Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
NO Sulfidic Odor NO Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
YES Aquic Moisture Regime YES Listed on local Hydric Soils List
YES Reducing Conditions. YES Listed on National Hydric Soils List
YES Gleyed or low Chroma Colors NO Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
e
e
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytlc Vegetation Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Hydric Soils Present?
Remarks:
.~ No
(es) No
~ No
..-
Is the Sampling Point within the Wetland? . ~ No
.
Page 2 of 2
WetFormlrft
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
ProjecVSite: 1-35W and 1-694 Site Project No: SUNDEOOOl
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineering, Inc,
Investigators: Wayne E. Jacobson, P.S,S.. PW,S,
Date: 19-Nov-1999
County: Ramsey
State: Minnesota
PlotlD: 5-1U
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site?
Is the-site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation:)?
Is the area a potential Problem Area?
(If needed, explain on the reverse side)
es
Yes
Yes
No
@
@
Community ID:
Transec1ID:
Field Location:
Upland field
5-1U
veCETATION
(USFWS-RegionNor3)
Dominant Plant Species(LatinlCommonl Stratum Indicator Plant Species(Latll)lCommon) Stratum Indicator
.. ". ,
Poa pratensis Herb FAC-
Bluegrass, Kentucky
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBlo FACW or FAC: I~AC Neutral: 0/0 = 0.00%
(excluding FAC-) 0/1 = 0.00% Numeric Index: 3/1 =3.00
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
NO Recorded Data(Describe in Remarks):
NI A Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
NlA Aerial Photographs'
N/A Other
YES No Recorded Data
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water in Pit:
Depth to Saturated Soil:
N1A (in,)
> 18 (in.)
> 18 (in.)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
j>rirnary Indicators
NO Inundated
NO Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
NO Water Marks
NO Drift Lino,s
NO Sediment Deposits
NO Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
NO Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
NO Water-Stained Leaves
NO Local Soil Survey Data
NO FAC-Neutral Test
NO Other (Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations
Remarks:
Page 1 of 2
WelFonnWl
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: 1-35W and 1-694 Site Project No: SUNDE0001
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineering, Inc.
Investigators: Wayne E. Jacobson, P,S,S,.PW,S,
Date: 19-Nov-1999
County: Ramsey
State: Minnesota
PlotlD: 5-1U
_
SOILS
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Hayden line sanely loam
Map Symbol: 1326 Drainage Class: Well drained Mapped Hydric Inclusion?
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Typic HapludaUs Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type? @ No
Profile Description
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Color Mottle
(Inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) AbundancelContrast Texture, Concretions, structl/fe, ~c
0-18 A 10YR3I2 N/A N/A N/A Sanely loam
Hydric Soli Indicators:
NO Hlstosol NO Concretions
NO Histic Epipedon NO High Organic Content In Surface Layer in Sandy Solis
NO SuIDdlc Odor NO Organic Streaking In Sandy Solis
NO Aquic Moisture Regime NO Listed on Local Hydric Solis List
NO Reducing Conditions NO Listed on National Hydric Solis List
NO Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors NO other (Explain In Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
_
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ( ~ . . Is the Sampling Point within the Weiland? Yes Q!V
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ( ~)
Hydric Soils Present? Yes' ( No)
Remarks:
_
Page 2 of 2
WelFormn
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
project/Sileo 1-35W and 1-694 Site Project No: SUNDEOool Date: 19- Nov-1999
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineering. Inc. County: Ramsey
Investigators: Wayne E. Jacobson, P,S,S" P.W,S, Slate: Minnesota
Plot ID: 5-1W
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? <JfjJ No Community ID: Type 2/3 Wet Meadow I Shallow Mars
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation:)? Yes ~ TransectlD: 5-1W
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes No Field location:
(If needed, explain on the reverse side)
_
VEGETAIION
\uSFWS Region No, J)
Dominant Plant Specles(LatinICommonl Stratum Indicator Plant Species(LatirVCommon\ Stratum Indicator
Phalaris arondinacea Herb FACW+ earox spp. Herb FACW
Grass,Reed Canary Sedge, unidentified
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBl, FACW or FAC: IrAC Neutral: 2/2 = 100.00%
(excluding FAC-) 2/2 = 100.00% Numeric Index: 4/2 =2.00
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
NO Recorded Data(Describe in Remarks):
NI A Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
NI A Aerial Photographs
Mh Other
YES No Recorded Data
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Primary Indicators
NO Inundated
YES Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
NO Water Marks
NO Drift Lines
NO Sediment Deposits
NO Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
NO Oxidized Root Channels In Upper 12 Inches
NO Water-Stained leaves
YES local Soil Survey Data
YES FAC-Neutral Test
NO Other (Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water in Pit:
Depth 10 Saturated Soil:
NI A (in.)
> 18 (in.)
= 12 (in.)
iRemarkS:
Page 1 012
WelFormb
_
_
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: 1-35W and 1-694 Site Project No: SUNDEOOOl
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineering, Inc,
Investigators: Wayne E. Jacobson, P,S,S" PoW,S,
Date: 1 9-Noy,1 999
County: Ramsey
State: Minnesota
PlotlD: 5-1W
.
SOilS
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Blufflon loam
Map Symbol: 75 Drainage Class: Very poorly drained Mapped Hydric Inclusion?
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Typic Haplaquolls Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type? @ No
"""lIe Descrlntlon ,
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Color Motile
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Texture, Concretions, Structure, etc
0-14 A 10YR2ll NJA NJA NJA loam
.
14,18 B 10YR3Il NJA NJA NJA Sandy loam
.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
NO Histosol NO Concretions
NO Histic Eplpedon NO High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
NO Sulfidic Odor . NO Organic Streaking In Sandy Soils
YES Aquic Moisture Regime YES Listed on local Hydric Soils list
YES Reducing Conditions YES Listed on National Hydric Soils List
YES Gleyed or low Chroma Colors NO Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: ....- -
_
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytlc Vegetalion Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Hydric Soils Present?
Remarks:
~.NO
~NO
(es) No
Is the SampUng Point within the Wetland?
~ No
_
Page 2 of 2
WetFotmw,
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: 1-35Wand 1,694 Sile Project No: SUNDEOOOl
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineering, Inc.
Investigators: Wayne E. Jacobson, P.S.S" P.W,S,
Date: 19,Nov,1999
County: Ramsey
State: Minnesota
PlotlD: 7.tU
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site?
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation:)?
Is the area a potential Problem Area?
(If needed, explain on the reverse side)
es
Yes
Yes
No
@
@
Community ID:
Transect ID:
Field Location:
Commercial Lawn
7-W
VEGETATION
(USFWS RegIo.. No. 3)
Dominant Plant SoecleSlLatin/Common.\ Stratum ndicatQr Plant SoecieslLalil)iCommonl Stratum Indicator
Poa pralensis Herb FAC-
Bluegrass,Kenlucky
,
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC: 1 FAC Neutral: 0/0 = 0.00%
(excluding FAC-) 0/1 - 0.00% Numeric Index: 3/1 =3.00
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
NO Recorded Data(Describe in Remarks):
NtA Stream, Lake or TIde Gauge
NtA Aerial Photographs
Nt A Other
YES No Recorded Data
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water In Pit:
NtA (in.)
>16 (in.)
> 18 (in.)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Primary Indicators
NO Inundated
NO Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
NO Water Marks
NO Drift Lines
NO Sediment Deposits
NO Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
NO Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
NO Water-Stained Leaves
NO Local Soil Survey Data
NO FAC-Neutral Test
NO Other (Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations
Depth to Saturated Soil:
Remarks:
Page 1012
WetFormlM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
. (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: 1-35W and 1-694 Site Project No: SUNDEOOOl
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineering, Ine,
Investigators: Wayne E. Jacobson, P.S.S., P.W.S.
Date: 19-Nov-1999
County: Ramsey
State: Minnesota
PlotlD: 7-1U
.
SOILS
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Hayden fine sanely loam
Map Symbol: 1328 Drainage Class: Well drained Mapped Hydric Inclusion?
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Typic Hapludalls field Observations Confirm Mapped Type? @ No
P--lIIe Descr!-tlon
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Color Mottle
(Inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Texture, Concretions, Structure, etc
0-6 A 10YR312 N1A N1A N1A Sand
,
8-18 B 10YR3/1 N1A N1A N1A Sand
Hydric Soil Indicators: ,
NO Hlstosol NO Concretions
NO Hlstlc Epipedon NO High Organic Content In Surface Layer In Sandy Soils
NO Sulfidic Odor NO Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
NO Aqulc Moisture Regime NO Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
NO Reducing Conditions NO Listed on National Hydric Soils List
NO Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors NO Other (Explain In Remarks)
Remarks: . ,.
e
WETLAND DETERMINATION
HydrophYtic Vegetation Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Hydric Soils Present?
Remarks:
Yes ~
Yes ~
Yes (No
Is the Sampling Point within the Wetland?
Yes @
e
Page 2 012
WetForm~
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: 1.35W and 1-694 Site Project No: SUNDEOOOl
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineering, Inc.
Investigators: Wayne E. Jacobson, P .S.S.. P .w,S.
Date: 19-Nov-1999
County: Ramsey
State: Minnesola
PlotlD: 7.1W
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site?
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation:)?
Is the area a potential Problem Area?
(If needed, explain on thereverse side)
es
Yes
Yes
No
@)
@
Community ID:
Transect ID:
Field location:
Type 4 Deep Marsh
7.1W
VEGETATION
(USPf\'S R"",io.. No.3)
Dominant Plant Soecies.lLatinlCQmmon\ ~ratum Indicator Plant Soecles(LatinfC.,mmonl Stratum Indicator
Typha angus/ifolia Herb OBL PoIygonum hydropiperoides Herb OBL
Callail,Narrow,Leal Smartweed,Swamp
Lorona minor Herb OBL
Duckweed,Lesser
.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBlo FACW or FAC: I; AC Neutral: 3/3 _100.00%
(excluding F AC-) 3/3 = 100.00% Numeric Index: 3/3 =1.00
Remarks:
.
HYDROLOGY
NO Recorded Data(Describe in Remarks):
N1A Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
"N1AAerlal Photographs
~ Other
YES No Recorded Data
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water In Pit:
Depth to Saturated Soil:
= 2 (in,)
N1A (in.)
N1A (in.)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Primary Indicators
YES Inundated
YES Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
NO Water Marks
NO Driflllnes
NO Sediment Deposits
NO Drainage Patterns In Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
NO Oxidized Root Channels In Upper 12 Inches
NO Water-Stained leaves
YES local Soli Survey Data
YES FAC-Neutral Test
NO Other (Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations
Remarks:
Page 1012
WetFormWn
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
ProjecVSite: 1-35W and 1-694 Site Project No: SUNDEOOOl
ApplicanVOwner: Sunde Engineering. Inc.
Investigators: Wayne E. Jacobson, P,S.S" P,W,S.
Date: 19-Nov-1999
County: Ramsey
State: Minnesota
PlotlD: 7-1W
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Blufflon loam
Map Symbol: 75 Drainage Class: Very poorly drained Mapped Hydric Inclusion?
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Typic Haplaquolis Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type? @ No
Profile Description
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Color Mottle
(Inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) AbundanceJContr;>st Texture, Concretions, Structure, etc
0-1 0 10YR2ll NJA NJA NJA Loam, Muck
1-18 A 5GY4/1 NJA NJA NJA Clay ioam
Hydric Soil indicators:
NO Hlstosoi NO Concretions
NO Hlstlc Eplpedon NO High Organic Content In Surface Layer in Sandy Solis
NO Sulfidic Odor NO Organic Streaking In Sandy Soils
YES Aquic Moisture Regime YES Listed on Local Hydric Soiis List
YES Reducing Conditions YES Listed on National Hydric Soils List
YES Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors NO Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMiNATiON
rophytic Vegetation Present?
lIand Hydrology Present?
Hydric Soils Present?
Remarks:
No
No
No
Is the Sampling Point within the Wetland?
es No
e
Page 2 of 2
WetFormlm
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Sile: 1-35W and 1.694 Site Project No: SUNDEOOOl
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineerlng, Inc,
Investigators: Wayne E. Jacobson. p,S,S.. P.W.S,
Date: 19-Nov-1999
County: Ramsey
Slate: Minnesota
PlotlD: 8-1U
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site?
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation:)?
Is the area a potential Problem Area?
(If needed, explain on the reverse side)
es
Yes
Yes
No
@
@
Community ID:
Transect ID:
Field Location:
Upland field
8-1U
--VEGET~11eN
(USr\'/S RegieR He. 3)
Dominant Plant Species(LatlnlCommon) Str~tum Indicator Plant Species(La!inICommonL Stratum Indicator
Poa pratensis Herb FAC- Trifolium pratense Herb FACU+
Bluegrass,Kentucky Clover ,Red
Digitaria sanguinalis Herb FACU Erigeron canadensis Herb UPL
Crabgrass, Hairy Horsewood
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBlo FACW or FAC: I r AC Neutral: 0/3 _ 0,00%
(excluding FAG-) 0/4 = 0.00% Numeric Index: 16/4 =4.00
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
NO Recorded Data(Describe in Remarks):
NJ A Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
NJA Aerial Photographs
Me, Other
YES No Recorded Data
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water in Pit:
Depth to Saturated Soil:
N/A (in.)
> 16 (in.)
> 18 (in.)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Primary Indicators
NO Inundated
NO Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
NO Water Marks
NO Drift Lines
NO Sediment Deposits
NO Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
NO Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
NO Water-Stained Leaves
NO Local Soil Survey Data
NO FAC-Neutral Test
NO Other (Explain In Remarks)
Field Observations
Remarks:
Page 1 01 2
WelFonnlm
.
e
e
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
ProjecVSite: 1-35W and 1.694 Sile Project No: SUNDEOOOl
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineering, Inc.
Investigators: Wayne E, Jacobson. P.S.S., PoW,S.
Date: 19-Nov-1999
County: Ramsey
State: Minnesota
PlotlD: 8-' U
SOILS
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Hayden fine sandy loam
Map Symbol: 1328 Drainage Class: Well drained Mapped Hydric Inclusion?
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Typic Hapludalls Field Observations Confinn Mapped Type? @ No
I'rl>I!lJl Pllscrh,lIon
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Color Mottle
(Inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Texture, Concretions, Struc1ure, etc
0-6 A 10YR412 N1A N1A N1A Sand
8-16 B 10YR312 N1A N1A N1A Sand
Hydric Soil Indicators:
NO Histosol NO Concretions
NO Histlc Epipedon NO High OrganIc Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
NO Sulfidic Odor NO Organic Streaking In Sandy Soils
NO Aqulc Moisture Regime NO Usted on local Hydric Soils Ust
NO Reducing Conditions NO listed on National Hydric Soils Ust
NO Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors NO Other (explain In Remarks)
Remarks;
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophylic Vegetation Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Hydric Solis Present?
Remarks:
Yes (No
Yes ~
Yes (No
Is the Sampling Point within the Wetland?
Yes Q!V
Page2012
WelFonn"'"
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
ProjecVSile: 1-35W and 1-694 Site Project No: SUNDEOOOl
Applicant/Owner: Sunde Engineering, Inc,
Investigators: Wayne E. Jacobson, P,S,S" PW,S,
Date: 19, Nov'1999
County: Ramsey
State: Minnesota
PlotlD: 8-1W
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site?
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation:)?
Is the area a potential Problem Area?
(II needed, explain on the reverse side)
VeGET P. TION
es
Yes
Yes
No
@
@)
Community ID:
Transect 10:
Field Location:
Type 3 Shallow Marsh
6-1W
Dominant Plant Species/Latin/Common) Stratum Indicator Plaot SDeJ;ies/\-atin/Co.mmonl Stratum Indit;l!tor
Cyanobacteria Herb OBL Lemna minor Herb OBL
Blue-green algae Duckweed,Lesser
.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBI., FACW or FAC: I r AC Neutral: 2/2 = 100.00%
(excluding FAC-) 2/2 = 100.00% Numeric Index: 2/2 = 1.00
Remarks:
-(USFWS llegionNor3)
HYDROLOGY
NO Recorded Data(Describe In Remarks):
N1A Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge,
N1A Aerial Photographs
Nt A Other
YES No Recorded Data
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water in Pit:
Depth to Saturated Soil:
N1A (in,)
= 16 (in.)
=6 (in.)
Weiland Hydrology Indicators
Primary Indicators
NO Inundated
YES Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
NO Water Marks
NO Drift Lines
NO Sediment Deposits
NO Drainage Patterns In Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
NO Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
NO Water-Stained Leaves
YES Local Soil Survey Data
YES FAC-Neutral Test
NO Other (Explain In Remarks)
Field Observations
Remarks:
Page 1 of2
WetFOITTl""
e
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 eOE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
ProjecVSite: 1-35W and 1-694 Site Project No: SUNDEOOOl
ApplicanVOwner: Sunde Engineering, Inc,
Investigators: Wayne E. Jacobson, P.S,S,. P.W.S,
.
SOilS
Date: 19-Nov,1999
County: Ramsey
State: Minnesota
PlotlD: 8-1 W
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Blufflon loam ,
Map Symbol: 75 Drainage Class: Very poorly drained Mapped Hydric Inclusion?
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Typic Haplaquolls Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type? @ No
l_fll. .~--
Depth Matrix Color MoUle Color MoUle
(Inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Texture, Concretions, Structure, etc
0-16 A 10YR3Il 7,5YR4/4 Common Distinct Clay loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
NO Hlstosol NO Concretions
. NO Histlc Epipedon NO High Organic Content in Surface Layer In Sandy Soils
NO Sulfidic Odor NO Organic Streaking In Sandy Soils
YES Aqulc Moisture Regime YES Listed on local Hydric Soils List
YES Reducing Conditions YES Listed on National Hydric Soils List
YES Gleyed or low Chroma Colors NO Other (Explain In Remarks)
Remarks:
e
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytlc Vegetalion Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Hydric Soils Present?
Remarks:
(es) No
~ No
(es) No
Is the Sampling Point within the Wetland?
~ No
e
Page 2 of 2
WetFormlm
Appendix B
Climatological Data (October-November 1999)
e
e
e
--- -..-.------------~ ~y.~
Jnd Temperature Summary for October, 1999
Temperature Precipitation
19h Low Month Dept. Month Dept.
- Avg. for Total for
Month Month
,N 69 19 41.6 -2.7 0.09 -1. 44
,ill 74 19 44.2 -1.5 1. 04 -0.64
/RAP. 64 22 41.4 -0.9 0,72 -0.B4
76 22 43.5 0.0 1.15 -1. 29
A FALLS 71 18 40.0 -2.4 0.69 -1.28
ASCl'> I~ ~0.2 -2, 7 1.14 -1. 20
. ,OLUTH 72 22 42.3 -1.4 2,36 -0.13
?GRAND M!\R. 64 26 42.6 -2.3 2.32 -O.lB
RIBBING 73 19 41.6 -0.6 1.48 -0.76
ALEXANDRIl'> 79 22 45.0 -1.3 0.50 -1. 77
BROWNS VAL 81 22 44.2 -2.9 0.54 -1.12
Cl\NBY B3 23 48.2 -0.1 0.69 -1.22
FERGUS FLS 7B 22 44,4 -0.7 0.63 -1.11
MONTEVIDEO 83 20 4B.0 -1. 7 0.47 -1. 42
MORRIS 83 22 45.3 -0.6 0.31 -1. 86
BECKER 79 23 47.6 1.7 1.06 -1.18
HUTCHINSON 79 23 48.0 -0.1 0.57 -1. 4B
OLIVIl'> 80 19 47.6 -0.6 0.89 -1. 2B
STl'>PLES BO 22 42.B -1. 3 0.59 -1. 65
ST. CLOUD 79 1B 45.6 -0.3 1.36 -0.85
WILLM!\R B1 11 46.4 -1.1 0.72 -1.56
l'>ITKIN 77 24 42.5 -2.4 1. 36 -1. 08
ClIMBRIDGE 73 19 45.4 -1.2 0.80 -1. 5B
MSP l'>IRPRT 78 26 49,5 0.7 0.92 -1. 27
STP Ci\MPUS 78 24 50. B 0.7 0.76 -1. 58
LAMBERTON 80 19 47,2 -1.1 0.95 -1.14
_ESTONE 80 1B 46,0 -0.7 0.77 -1. 29
WOOD FL B2 22 49.3 -0.4 0.99 -1. 09
OUX FLS. 81 22 49.0 0.4 0.3B -1.40
WORTRINGT. 79 22 47.2 -0,3 0,74 -1.21
Fl\RIBl'>ULT 7B 22 46.6 -2.1 2.20 -O.lB
Wl'>SECl'> 79 20 47.2 -0.6 2,45 0.00
WINNEBAGO 79 23 48,0 -0.2 1.88 -0.43
Ll'> CROSSE 76 25 49.8 -0.4 0.99 -1. 21
RED WING 76 22 47.0 -0,2 1.20 -1.36
ROCHESTER 74 21 46,8 -1.1 0.92 -1.40
ROSEMOUNT 7B 22 50.4 1.3 0.94 -1. 62
WINONl'> 7B 28 50.4 0.7 1.30 -1. 00
District Averages
l'>vg, Dept. Avg. Dept
Temp. from Pree. from
District Norm. Norm.
1 (Northwest) 42.4 -1.7 0.62 -0.97
2 (North Central) 41.2 -1.7 0,99 -1.26
3 (Northeast) 42.2 -1.4 2.05 -0.36
4 (West Central) 45,8 -1.2 0.52 -1,42
5 (Central) 46.3 -0.3 0,86 -1.33
/6 (East Central) 47.0 -0,6 0.96 -1.38
7 (Southwest) 47.7 -0.4 0.77 -1.23
B (South Central) 47,3 -1.0 2.1B -0.20
9 (Southeast) 48.9 0.1 1,07 -1.32
Statewide l'>verage 45.4 -0.9 1.11 -1.05
~ of the departures from normal are derived through estimates.
~ in this summary are courtesy of National Weather Service Offices and
Cooperators. and the University of Minnesota Agricultural Experiment Station.
12110/99 3:59 PM
,\W^""'''"'~_OO,,\..,,''''' "1"1"'."
~"l
.12"
,"os
- 0.
!9 'lIl
..
f
"
~
iU
..~S
'() 0.
" ~
il-
"
3
~
filL NO. DESIGN
0001,00 DRAWING AMG.
1 GATt CHECKED "J
12/13/tt
'.
\l'~l
'O~
.. 0.
~ 'tl
"
8-
~
iH i
OS
~~ ~ ~
~ ~
! b
~ \l'n ~
"
~ -10 ~
.. 0.
'() 'tl
I
i~!
~fl
o
~ ~
~
]-
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
.
~;!!if
~llll
n
8: ~
..
S
0.
~
,..
~
i!!
"
~
"'
%
g
~
"
J
~
~
! ,.. l'l
~
z 11
c
"
" ~ 0 ~<:
~
~~ ~
~~ %
a
~
~~ ~
g~ " l'l
I herMty cwwr thol thll p1M _ lH'.........:I by m. ....
"""'""my......t~......tlwoll......duIJl
R...I....dP'ofMII6MIW.llgn4~Utltlllc.rUflld
by~tr,of~t..
oot~-,.f1~.,. No. 1000
EXlSTm WETLANl BASH!
LOCATED 6Y GPS SURVEYING
il
'!I
~
0
... ~
~ ~
~
z ~
c
" ~
~
"' m
0
% "
g
~
I-35W & Hl94
DEVELOPM:NT AREA
Sl.HlE ~ NO.
01/30/2002 16:25 FAX :r [4] 002/007
ANl'1J f) \ >C
CSAH 96 at Round Lake Road PM Peak
e Development Volumes and Existing Geometries
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
,.; -.. 't -f - "- ~ t ~ \.. ! ~
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WB!., WBT WBR NBL lliIT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations +- ,- ;r- H 1j1j .,
Total Lost Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3,0 3.0 3,0 3,0
Satd. Flow (prol) 0 1863 1583 1770 3539 0 3433 0 1583 0 0 0
Fit Perm. 0,154 0.950
Satd. Row (perm) 0 1863 1583 '287 3539 0 3433 0 1583 0 0 0
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 196 257
Volume (vph) 0 606 176 95 408 0 877 0 474 0 0 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 673 196 106 453 0 974 0 527 0 0 0
Turn Type Perm Pm+Pt Custom Custom
Protected Phases 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 2 6 8 a
Total Split (5) 0.0 47.0 47.0 8.0 55.0 0.0 35.0 0.0 35.0 0.0 0.0 0,0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 819 806 233 1894 1307 762
vIs Ratio Prot 0.36 0.02 0.13
vIs Ratio Perm 0.11 0.22 0.28 0.26
Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes
Acl Effct Green (5) 31.3 31.3 38.1 38.1 27.1 27.1
Actualed glC Ratio 0.44 0.44 0.54 0.54 0.38 0.38
vlc Ratio 0.82 0.24 0.45 0.24 0.75 0.69
Uniform Delay, dl 17.5 0.0 8.2 8.8 19.0 8.8
. Platoon Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
lncr. Delay, d2 9.1 0.7 1.4 0.3 2.4 2.7
Webster Delay 26.6 0,7 9.6 9.1 21,4 11.5
Webster LOS C A A A C B
Cycle Length: 90
Actuated Cycle Length: 71.2
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinatlld
Total Lost Time: 9
Sum of Critical VIS Ralios: 0.67
Intersection vIe Ratio: 0.74
Intersection Webster Signal Delay: 17.1
Intersection LOS: B
3: CSAH 96 & Round Lake Road
~'1~ wE
e
Synchro 4 :Report
Page 1
sehinc-ff41
01/30/2002 16: 25 FA,'! I4J 003/007
CSAH 96 at Round Lake Road PM Peak
Development Volumes and Proposed Geometries
Lanes, Volumes, Timings ' e
.-J. .. .( ..t- "- ..... t ~ ...,. + ..;
-
Lane Group EBL EST EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 'oj- tt r 'oj H l' ~ t r 'oj t- r
Total Losl Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3539 1583 1770 3539 1583 3433 1863 1583 1770 1863 1583
Fit Perm. 0.950 0.950 0.750 0.750
SaId, Flow (perm) 1770 3539 1583 1770 3539 1583 2710 1863 1583 1397 1863 1583
SaId. Flow (RTOR) 196 13 279 9
Volume (vph) 46 606 176 95 408 12 877 10 474 34 10 8
Lane Group Flow (vph) 51 673 196 106 453 13 974 11 527 38 11 9
Tum Type Prot Perm Prot Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm
Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 4
Permitted Phases 2 6 8 8 4 4
Total Split (5) 10.0 28.0 28.0 15.0 33.0 33.0 47.0 47.0 47.0 47.0 47.0 47.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 97 1034 601 199 1238 562 1271 874 891 655 874 747
vis Aalio Prot 0.03 0.19 0.06 0.13 0.01 0.01
vis Ratio Perm 0.10 0.Q1 0.S6 0.28 0.03 0.Q1
Crltlcal LG? Yes Yes Yes
Act Effet Green (5) 3.9 20.8 20.8 8,0 24.9 24,9 33.4 33.4 33.4 33.4 33.4 33.4
Actuated giG Ratie 0.05 0.29 0.29 0.11 0.35 0.35 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47
vie Ratio 0,53 0.65 0.33 0.53 0.37 0.02 0.77 0.01 0.59 0.06 0.01 0.01
Uniform Delay, dl 32.7 22.0 0.0 29.8 17.2 0.0 15.7 10.1 5.8 10.3 10.1 0.0
Platoon Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 '.00
Incr. Delay, d2 5.1 3.2 1.4 2.7 0.8 0.1 2,8 0.0 1,' 0,0 0.0 o.oe
Webster Delay 37.8 25.2 1.4 32.5 18,1 0.1 18.5 10.1 6,9 10.3 10.1 0.0
Webster LOS D C A C B A B B A B B A
Cycle Length; 90
Actuated Cycle Length: 71.2
Control Type: Ac:tuated-Uncoordinated
Total Lost Time: 9
Sum of Critical vis Ratios: 0.61
Intersection vie Ratio: 0.68
Intersection Webster Signal Delay: 17.3
Intersection LOS, B
3: CSAH 96 & Round Lake Road
t'lo .4
..',"
'", ',.
Synchro 4 Report.
Page j
sehinc-ff41
01/30/2002 18:25 FAX
I4i 004/007
CSAH 96 at NB 1-35W Exit Ramp PM Peak
e East Ramps Development Volumes and Proposed Geometrics
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
~ - " -f .- 4-.. '" t I' '. ! ~
Lane Group EBl EBT EBR WBl WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations "i ++ +t r- ot r
Total lost Time (s) 3,0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3539 0 0 3539' 1583 0 1770 ,1583 0 0 0
Fit Perm. 0.118 0.950
Satd. Flow (perm) 220 3539 0 0 3539 1583 0 1770 1583 0 0 0
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 297 172
Volume (vph) 77 718 0 0 857 267 64 0 303 0 0 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 66 798 0 0 952 297 0 71 337 0 0 0
Tum Type Pm+Pt Perm Perm Perm
Protected Phases 5 2 6 6
Permitted Phases 2 6 8 8
Total Split (s) 10.0 37.0 0.0 0.0 27.0 27.0 23.0 23.0 23.0' 0.0 0.0 0.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 267 2179 1653 898 455 534
.' vIs Ratio Pro! 0.03 0,23 0.27
vIs Ratio Perm 0.17 0,15 0,04 0.16
CrITical LG? Yes Yes Yes
Act Effet Green (s) 29.0 29.0 22.0 22.0 12.1 12.1
Actuated glC Ratio 0.62 0.62 0,47 0,47 0.26 0,26
vie Ratio 0.32 0.37 0.58 0.33 0.16 0.63
Unnorm Delay, d1 3.7 4.5 9.1 0.0 13.5 7.2
Platoon Faetor 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
e Incr. Delay, d2 0.7 0,5 1.5 1.0 0,2 2.4
Webs.ter Delay 4.4 5.0 10.6 1.0 13.7 9.6
Webster LOS A A B A B A
Cycle Length: 60
Actuated Cycle Length: 47,1
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Total Lost Time: 9
Sum of Critical vIs Ratios: 0.47
Intersection vIe Ratio: 0.55
Intersection Webster Signal Delay: 7.5
Intersection LOS: A
Spins and Phases: 3: CSAH 96 & NB I-SSW off Ramp
-4.2
',"r:.' ,.~:
/' .5 08
;, ' ,.' " ~ ',",
e
sehinc. ff41
Synchro 4 Report
Page 1
01/JO/2002 16:25 FAX
141 005/007
CSAH 96 at NB 1-35W Exit Ramp PM Peak
EastRam s
lanes, Volumes, Timings
.,}- - "T ~ - "-- ~ t I" \. + ..;
Lane Group EBl EBT EBR ~ WBT WBR lli!.b NBT NBR SBl SBT SBR
Lane Configurations .ft +t r' 4 ~
Total Lost Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 ' 3.0
Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3522 0 0 3539 1583 0 1770 1583 0 0 0
FIt Perm. 0.682 L 0.950
Satd. Flow (perm) 0 2414 0 0 3539 1583 0 1770 1583 0 0 0
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 297 178
Volume (vph) 77 718 0 0 857 267 64 0 303 0 0 0
Lane Group Fiow (vph) 0 884 0 0 952 297 0 71 337 0 0 0
Tum Type Pm+pt Perm Perm Perm
Protected Phases 5 2 6 8
Permitted Phases 2 6 8 8
Total Split (s) 9.0 37.0 0.0 0.0 28.0 28.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
lane Grp Cap (vph) 1652 1534 854 443 529
vis Ratio Prot 0.07 0.27
vis Ratio Perm 0.27 0.15 0.04 0.16
Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes
Act Effct Green (s) 30.0 20.8 20.8 12.0 12.0
Aotualed g/C Ratio 0.63 0.43 0.43 0.25 0.25
vie Ralio 0.54 0.62 0.35 0.16 0.64
Uniform Delay, d1 4.5 10.5 0.0 14.1 72
Platoon Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incr. Delay, d2 0.3 1.9 1.1 0.2 2.5 e
Webster Delay 4.8 12.4 1.1 14.2 9.7
Webster LOS A B A B A
Cycle Length: 60
Actuated Cycle Length: 48
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Tolal Losl Time: 9
Sum of Crltloal vis Aatios: 0.51
Intersection vlc Aatio: 0.59
Intersection Webster Signal Delay: 8.2
Intersection LOS: A
3: CSAH 96 &. NB 1-3SW off Ramp
,," ~:' ~ :'::1
""toll
1.,:\'. :":: ""..
e
Syncrno4Report
Page 1
sebinc-lf41
e
e
e
01/30/2002 16:25 FAX
CSAH 96 at 58 1-35W Exit Ramp
West Ramps
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
Lane Group
Lane Configurations
Total LostTime (s)
Satd, Flow (prot)
Fit Perm.
Satd. Flow (perm)
Satd. Flow (RTOR)
Volume (vph)
Lane Group Flow (vph) .
Tum Type
Protected Phases
Permitted Phases
Total Split (s)
Lane Grp Cap (vph)
vIs Ratio Prot
vIs Ratio Penn
Critical LG?
Act Eflct Green (s)
Actuated giG Ratio
vlc Ratio
Uniform Delay, d1
Platoon Factor
Incr. Deiay, d2
Webster Delay
Webster LOS
..J-
---+
EBT
t
3.0 3.0
o 1863
EeL
o 1863
o 705
o 783
0.0 40.0
1488
0.42
56.3
0.80
0.53
2.5
1.00
1.3
3.8
A
"'y
EBR
l'
3.0
1583
1583
204
184
204
Perm
2
2
40.0
1305
0.12
56.3
0.80
0.16
0.0
1.00
0.3
0.3
A
..
WBL
-
wer
<tt
3.0 3.0
o 3465
0.531
o 1879
400 523
o 1025
Perm
6
6
40.0 40.0
1501
0.55
Yes
56.3
0.80
1.34dl
3.1
1.00
2.5
5.7
A
Cycle Length: 60
Actuated Cycle Length: 70,5
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Total Lost Time: 6
Sum of Critical vIs Ralios: 0.59
Intersection vIe Ratio: 0.66
Intersection Webster Signal Delay: 4.6
Intersection LOS: A
dl Delacto Left Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a left lane.
14J 006/007
Development Volumes and Existing Geometries
PM Peak
"-- '"
WBR NBL
3.0 3,0
o 0
o 0
o 0
o 0
0.0 0.0
t
NBT
3.0
o
I'
NBR
3.0
o
o
o
o
0.0
o
'. !
seL seT
4'
3.0 3.0
o 1770
0.950
o 1no
o
o
33 0
o 37
Penn
0.0
4
20.0 20.0
206
0.02
8.2
0.12
0.18
28.1
1.00
0.4
28.5
C
r-'-'" "~~~'SB~~'_' r l
~:::-::::nlll:: ~.'-'"''
~
SBR
.,
3.0
1583
1583
116
104
116
Penn
4
4
20.0
287
0,05
Yes
8.2
0.12
0.40
0.0
1.00
0.9
0.9
A
.ehinc-ff41
Synchro 4 Report
Page 1
01/JO/2002 16:25 FAX
IiZJ 007/007
CSAH 96 & 1-3SW West Ramps PM Peak
West Ram ps Development Volumes & Proposed Geometries e
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
/ -;. "'t .. - , ~ t I' \. ! ~
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations ~ r ~ tt <1 r
Total Lost Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3539 1583 1770 3539 0 0 0 0 0 1770 1583
Fit PenTl. 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3539 1583 1770 3539 0 0 0 0 0 1770 1583
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 220 124
Volume (vph) 0 769 198 410 563 0 0 0 0 62 0 112
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 843 220 456 626 0 0 0 0 0 69 124
Turn Type Perm Prot Perm Perm
Protected Phases 2 1 6 4
Permitted Phases 2 4 4
Total Split (s) 0.0 33.0 33.0 37.0 70.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.0 20.0 20.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1364 745 619 2774 210 297
vIs Ratio Prot 0.24 0.26 0,18
vIs Ratio Perm 0,11 0.04 0.05
Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes
Act Effct Green (s) 23.7 23.7 21.5 48.2 7.3 7.3
Actuated glC Ratio 0.39 0.39 0.35 0.78 0.12 0.12
v/c Ratio 0.62 0.30 0.74 0,23 0.33 0.42
Unfform Delay, d1 15.2 0,0 17,5 1.7 24.8 0.0
Piatoon Fador 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00
Incr. Delay, d2 2.1 1.0 4.6 02 0.9 1,Oe
Websler Delay 17.4 1,0 22.1 1.9 25.7 1.0
Webster LOS B A C A C A .
Cycle Length: 90
Actuated Cycie Length: 61 .5
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Totai Lost Time: 9
Sum of Critical vIs Ralios: 0.55
Intersection vlc Ratio: 0.61
Intersection Webster Signal Deiay: t 2,0
Intersection LOS: B
Splits and Phases: 3: CSAH 96 & sa 1-35W Exit Ram
.f ~1
,j:.:),:, :,/,""
"
N ;11 projectla-e\ches.\O I 0 1\ W est Ramps-proposed.sy6
1130/2002
sehinc-ff41
Synchro 4 Repon e
Page 1
.
.
.
e
e
~
~
EN HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: February 15, 2002
TO: Mayor and City Council
loe Lynch, City Administrator
FROM: Aaron Parrish, City Planner !If
SUBJECT: Planning Commission Appointments
There are currently three vacancies on the Planning Commission, After soliciting applicants for
the position, we have received tluee applicants including:
I. Jim Sommerfield
2. Liz Modesette (Indicates possibly on the application)
3. Ray McGraw
Applications submitted by the residents above have been included for your review, In addition,
the City had previously interviewed a number of applicants last year for previous vacancies,
This list is enclosed for your reference, At this point, staff is requesting direction on the process
Council would like to use to select the applicants. If the Council would like to conduct
interviews, we could arrange this prior to the February 25, 2002 Council meeting.
e
.
e
DATE: i-
~
~HlLLS
CITY APPLICATION FORM
ADVISORY COMMITTEE, COMMISSION, TASK FORCE
-t,P..... "''( 0..- -n .~l~
JAt'! 2 2 2002 I
, '
! (Try (y.: f~_r.:c::_~F:'; rilU_S I
..._______.___ --.i
, 7 -0 2, How did you learn of vacancy?
-d-\l""\ 5JY""""'~~U
J '7 I 1) GJ~ ,,~-{>-....) Av p
(;5\ G'~9 ~?l5D
b.51 G31 D G 13
NAME:
ADDRESS:
(Sf G If 't If-111
,
(W)
PHONE:
(H)
(FAX) --.i rl')5-""\"T)~~ ~E-Mail)
~ ~t,'. e.!:>'n"
ADVISORY COMMITTEES:
(If you wish to be considered for more than one committee, please order in number of
preference, )
Communications Committee
Operations & Finance
Committee
Parks, Trails & Recreation
Committee
/
Planning Commission
SPECIFIC INTERESTS:
(As the Council prioritizes its goals, it may create additional/new committees or task forces
from time to time. If you are interested in any ofthe following or if you share any other
specific areas or topics of interest, we will retain your application for future openings in those
areas as new committees are created.)
_ City Events Task Force
Maintenance Facility Task Force
Web site Task Force
Other Interests:
(continued)
WORK EXPERIENCE:
f<,e. ol tnr- 1<1"lC, - (' "....~,q..
Co.-..1liW-",,\ e"1l-r)9(>-r C~ ;~>rr..-n."",i(~,>o,Y\9, 19CAD-f't95
LJ "fiV\ ~TN.J .1...k.ol --t~",o~",,\ <C'!jS~~bn+ I '11 '1~ f'13b
SllU~\ 'w"::orK~rl cld~:.,-.,~5f'.",-nr 197:3-1'1 '11
CIVIC, PROFESSIONAL & COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES:
t-A;v~ '\
~\"'w~,."s r~~ ~~r- --f~"r ~~,.... LL...."..,:-' 1
'r-
WHY DO YOU WANT TO BE ON AN ADVISORY COMMITTEE:
.arrr,~-...n~ -11). ~lV~, ~~~-Tk;-.-rj~~1l o_-mrt'.~~~
\...,;~,,\.., 'J:.~ e..i\\"1>\\d V~r\ fI'V'-~ "I', ./' ~"'Yl\tl:.Vv'\tr S;1'Id. f0/7~
WHAT SKILLS, STRENGTHS OR ABILITIES DO YOU BELIEVE YOU WILL ADD
TO THE COMMITTEE:
C JY r"~ ~n. h",~;^....\ (k-~~Jd,.,. \ n= \ ,~~~ ~r<k'j
~ :J' I ":If-.... V '
12. (b-f",~~"-"""'~' ~/l~~<.l!~.L'V~-v5~ ...rt",j - ~'Y\5 p~c. ;V'~
AD ITIONAL COMMENt'S: ~
e
b.,;"''tioS
CbrNT\~ ~~"iiY
-f1\:,'-nj ~
-J K-;J. "",
0\ -dr'.':+ h 0J-U);, ,~W ~
REFERENCES (Optional)
Name
Address
Phone
Av<..I~ ~I!~l/,J
Please return this form, with resume, to:
City Hall/Attn: City Administrator
City of Arden Hills
1245 West Highway 96
Arden Hills, MN 55112-5794
Telephone: (651) 634-5120 - Fax: (651) 634-5137
M:\USERS\SHEILAIADMIN\COMMITIEIAPPLlCAT. WPD
/hit'" k 'fi?,.J.
e
e
01/24/02 THU 08:12 PAX
FAX L4000
Ii!I 001
e
~
~HILLS
CITY APPLICATION FORM
ADVISORY COMMITTEE, COMMISSION, TASK FORCE
DATE: I' Z 4, OZ- How did you learn of vacancy? sS.
NAME: L-z.... Mode..c,f'-Ik-
ADDRESS: 7:>7'-/2:, N~\5Ir~~ "R.,\
PHONE: (n:::;J.(o.<,) ''30!P7 (H) 7/~~.:5It/''17CYC; (W)
7/D:" SI t..{. 'Zf(P07 (FAX) J tUaJ.p....:Ik.fl/f1cO",,8~~-Mail)
ADVISORY COMMITTEES:
(If you wish to be considered for more than one committee, plea", order in number of
preference. )
e
Commnnications Committee
Operations & Finance
Committee
Parks, Trails & Recreation
Committee
r,
Planning Commission
SPECIFIC INTERESTS:
(As the Council prioritizes its goals, it maycreate additionallnew committees or task forces
from time to time, If you are interested in any of the following or if you share auy other
specific areas or topics of interest, we will retain your application for future openings in those
areas as new committees are created,)
_ City Events Task Force
L Maintenance Facility Task Force
Website Task Force
Other Interests:
(continued)
WORK EXPERIENCE:
-Pro ied r1 CUt a ~ - fl!c {"v vrf- c.!"Ma<1-r.;of-, ''^^-
.
01/24/02 TH\I 08:12 FAX
FAX L4000
crnc, PROFESSIONAL & COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES:
./t1/'n Jf u,cxh.- fil>i.r red<- r!OVIlf'" I) iA/1nH~ ~ "Dt<;rf(f~uc.h~
S J~ J1v.. p~s-f
WHY DO YOU WANT TO BE ON AN ADVISO RY COMMITTEE: ~_. '
.--r;, WlvKI' G\. t'~,'buJ,'rrvt .h} I"rU.4 t"./hn..-mu.-t;1 '
WHAT SKILLS, STRENGTHS OR ABILITIES DO YOU BELIEVE YOU WILL ADD
TO THE COMMITTEE:
~I'//I"")~.vn r1J lAJoYk-fbu.lrl ('.bn,s.e.".,..,l.U) , e-':'f.u,<hlCL
'--'^- COJ.tL>rh--cJ(~ /~('lt.f<W
I
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
REFERENCES (Optional)
Name
AddIess
Phone
(J prm. ( <f, lI.n', <J-
Please return this form, with resume, to:
City HallJAttn: City Administrator
City of Arden Hills
1245 West Highway 96
Arden Hills, MN 55112-5794
Telephone: (65l) 634-5120 - Fax: (651) 634-5137
M:\USERS\SHEILA \ADMfN\COMMITTE\APPLICA T.WPD
~002
e
e
e
.
.
.
~
~LLS
CITY APPLICATION FORM
. ISORY COMMITTEE, COMMISSION, TASK FORCE
DATE: I
,;
(f? ( How did you learn of vacancy?
~.?zlt!2'" J (;, f/I1ltp-w
I 27. 80f S' I:/hJ
~{J" 3 ~ -V32..'f (H)
NAME:
ADDRESS:
(W)
PHONE:
(FAX)
(E-Mail)
ADVISORY COMMITTEES:
(If you wish to be considered for more than one committee, please order in number of
preference.)
Communications Committee
Operations & Finance
Committee
Parks, Trails & Recreation
Committee
+
Planning Commission
SPECIFIC INTERESTS:
(As the Council prioritizes its goals, it may create additional/new committees or task forces
from time to time, If you are interested in any of the following or if you share any other
specific areas or topics of interest, we will retain your application for future openings in
those areas as new committees are created.)
~ City Events Task Force
Website Task Force
_ Maintenance Facility Task Force
Other Interests:
(continued)
CIVIC, PROFESSIONAL & COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES:
-
WHY DO YOU WANT TO BE ON AN ADYISORY COMMITTEE:
WHAT SKILLS, STRENGTHS OR ABILITIES DO YOU BELIEVE YOU WILL ADD
TO THE COMMITTEE:
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
-
REFE CES (Optional)
Nam :wL
Address
Phone
t>1-
Please return this form, with resume, to:
City HalllAttn: City Administrator
City of Arden Hills
1245 West Highway 96
Arden Hills, MN 55112-5794
Telephone: (651) 634-5120 - Fax: (651) 634-5137
M ,IUS ERSISHEILA \ADM INICOMMmEIAPPLlCA T. WPD
e
I
e
PUBLIC NOTICE
AGENDA
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING, CITY HALL
MONDAY, DECEMBER 4, 2000, 5:30 P.M.
The Arden Hills City Council has scheduled a Special City Council meeting for the
purpose of interviewing prospective applicants for a vacancy on the City's Planning
Commission,
PLANNING COMMISSION INTERVIEWS
e
5:30p.m. Roger Aiken
5:45 p.m. lennifer M. Marrone
6:00 p.m. Warren W. Pakulski
6:15p.m. lames David Smith
6:30 p.m. Cathy Smithknecht
6:45 p.m. Michael R. Stephens
7:00 p.m. Linda Swanson
7:15 p,m, A. Clayton Zimmerman
The above times may vary depending upon length of discussion.
POSTED:
e
.-
.
e
e
...J
~
~
EN HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: February 12,2002
TO: Mayor and City Council
10e Lynch, City Administrator
FROM: Aaron Parrish, City Planner ;;1
SUBJECT: Local Stormwater Management Plan
Overview
Attached please find the Local Storm Water Management Plan (LSWMP) based on the input
received to date. To reduce expenses, the Appendices of the document have not been included.
If you would like the appendices, please feel free to e-mail me at aaron.parrish(al,ci.arden-
hills.mn.us or leave me a voicemail (651-634-5125) over the weekend and I will make
arrangements to get them to you. In order to obtain final approval of the plan, the following
needs to occur:
1. Council review and comment of the document at the Worksession. Consider directing
staff to forward the plan to Rice Creek Watershed District for their approval.
2. Rice Creek Watershed District considers approval of the LSWMP.
3. Upon approval by Rice Creek, the City Council considers formal adoption of the plan.
4. Once the plan has been formally adopted, staff will submit the plan along with the Flood
Plain and Erosion and Sediment Control ordinances to the Metropolitan Council for final
approval of the City's Comprehensive Plan (The City was previously given a November
2001 deadline by the Metropolitan Council for final submission of the Comprehensive
Plan).
When the pubic comment draft ofthe LSWMP was distributed, the City received responses from
the Rice Creek Watershed District, Ramsey County Soil and Water Conservation District, and
the Metropolitan Council. Suggestions and comments received from the Rice Creek Watershed
District were incorporated into the final version of the LSWMP as appropriate. A draft letter
from the City Administrator to Rice Creek is included for your review, In addition, a letter to the
Ramsey County Soil and Water Conservation District will also be prepared. While the City is
not officially obligated to incorporate their suggestions, we have done so as appropriate.
Local Stormwater Management Plan Memo
February 12, 2002
Page 2 of2
Aside from the current statutory requirements to create a LSWMP, in the near future the MPCA
will also require MS4's (Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems) to obtain a permit.
Arden Hills has not officially been notified that they are a designated MS4 by the MPCA, but
this appears very likely to occur by mid-2002. A permit application will need to be prepared
along with a "Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program" that identifies Best Management
Practices and how we intend to implement them, The permit also requires public participation,
annual reporting to determine progress toward goals, employee training on best management
practices, erosion and sediment control requirements (we already have these in place), and some
additional ordinance modifications, Given the MPCA's current timeline, the permit application
along with the City's Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program would need to be submitted by
March 2003. Given the aforementioned consideration, depending on how the MPCA's
permitting requirements evolve, we may have to make some modifications to the LSWMP in the
near future, Staff will keep you updated as additional information becomes available, Please
feel frce to contact me if you should have any questions.
Requested Action
,
e
I. Consider directing staff to forward the LSWMP to Rice Creek Watershed District for their
approval. e
Attachments
1. Local Stormwater Management Plan (Excluding Appendices)
2. Letter from Rice Creek Watershed District
3. Draft Response to Rice Creek Watershed District's Letter
e
Mr. Joel Schilling
Short, Elliot, and Hendrickson, lne.
3535 Vadnais Center Drive
St. Paul, MN 55110-5196
4
Board of Manage
Regular Meetings:
2nd and 4th Wednesdays
at Shoreview City Hall
.
/;):(~),
, ',....i/
-. :\,$/
Rice Creek Watershed
November 26, 2001
3585 N, LEXINGTON AVENUE, SUITE 330
ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA 55126.8056
PHONE 651.766.4191 . FAX 6SJ.766.4196
,~
BONITA TORPE, Admin. Assist.
Re: City of Arden Hills Draft Local Surface Water Management Plan - 60-Day Review
Dear Mr. Schilling,
Emmons & Olivier Resources, engineers for the Rice Creek Watershed District, have completed our
review of the City of Arden Hills Draft Local Stormwater Management Plan, dated September 2001.
The purpose of this memorandum is to outline the Rice Creek Watershed District's questions and
concerns regarding the Draft Plan.
The current issues are listed below with reference to the section in the Draft Plan.
. General
The Final Report by the Arden Hills Water Quality Task Force, 2000 identifies many issues I
problems as well as strategic actions to correct these issues I problems. It is unclear from the CIP and
Implementation Plan if the majority of the recommended actions will be taken I funded. The Draft
Plan should reference this document as containing the identification of problems and corrective
actions. These corrective actions should then be tied into the implementation section and funding
sources should be identified.
There are many misspelled words and grarrunatical mistakes in the text of the Draft Plan. These are
not specifically mentioned in our review.
Section 2 - Utilities
The Draft Plan states that the City requires stormsewer to be installed with the reconstruction of
streets. Installing curb and gutter and stormsewer will not necessarily have a positive effect on the
Cities water resources, They will convey the stormwatermore quickly, washing all of the pollutants
off the impervious surfaces to downstream receiving waters. Drainage ways and ditches are a more
narural means of conveying stormwater that provide for water quality treatment, a longer time of
concentration, and natural attenuation of pollutants. The watershed understands that the City is also
proposing significant regional stormwater treatment ponds to treat the stormwater, but it may be
more feasible and less costly to the residents to maintain the existing conveyance system of drainage
ways and ditches, while achieving the same outcome of protecting water quality in area lakes and
e wetlands.
A.J, CARDINAL, SR.
ANOKA COUNTY
TOM WADDELL
RAM5EY COUNTY
BOARD OF MANAGERS
JAMES A, LEROUX
WASHINGTON COUNTY
ORDEEN J, BRAATHEN
RAMSEY COUNTY
ROBIN C. DOEGE
ANOK.... COUNTY
EMMONS & OLIVIER RESOURCES Consulting Engineers &51-770-8448 . Co.Counsel: HAROLD H. SHEFF 612.332.1000, MICHEllE J. ULRICH 651.699-9845
Arden Hills Draft SWMP - 2
The City should consider amending their ordinances and this requirement to allow for flexibility in ...
determining the most cost-effective and beneficial means of treating storm water runoff. ..
Section 3 - Hydraulic and Water Quality Analysis
The existing information should be summarized in a figure that identifies the existing water quality
treatment with regard to NURP standards for each subwatershed (see attached example). This figure
will allow for identification of water quality treatment ponds and subwatersheds that will benefit
from retrofitting or regional water quality ponding. Identify locations of non-treated discharges to
City Lakes and Creeks for future retrofit opportunities, It appears that the City has the majority of the
information needed to construct this summery map.
Section 4 - Objectives and Policies
Objective G - The current Wetland Conservation Act provisions (8420.0540) include a section on
maintaining the phosphorus removal efficiency of stormwater ponds used for wetland
mitigation/ replacement. If the City of Arden Hills plans to use stormwater ponds or portions of them
for wetland replacement credits in the future, the LWMP is required to have language addressing this
neW provision,
Section 5 - Implementation Program
The Implementation Program focuses on the feasibility and construction of several stormwater
improvement projects. The RCWD applauds the City of Arden Hills prior efforts to identify this need
and develop this implementation program. The RCWD will expect to be kept up to date on the
outcomes of the feasibility studies and their implementation. The RCWD will accept this
implementation program and CIP with this understanding. e
CostfBenefit for Pollutant Removal
The cost/benefit analysis conducted as part of this planning process has not taken into account
several items, specifically Table 9 should include columns identifying the pollutant removal capability
of each practice. The newly published "Minnesota Urban Small Sites BMP Manual", prepared for the
Metropolitan Council by BARR Engineering, 2001, should be referenced as a local document that
identifies many alternatives to traditional retention/ detention ponds and explains in detail the
benefits provided. Costs were not included in this local manual because they were deemed too
variable early in the planning process (Oberts, G., personnel communications). Weighing the benefits
on the cost of the stormwater treatment facility alone does not account for the differing nature of
pollutant removal capabilities of, for example, infiltration practices which reduce the over",J] volume
of water leaving the site and significantly reduces the pollutant removal well below that of a standard
NURP pond.
This part of the Draft Plan specifically identifies detention ponds as the stormwater BMP of choice for
the City of Arden Hills. This is in contradiction to recommendations and strategies identified in the
Final Report - Arden Hills Water Quality Task Force. This report specifically recommends including
RCWD infiltration BMPs as first choice planning options and maximizing long-term benefits to cost
using Metro Council's BMPs and RCWD infiltration practices in the Water Management Plan. These
recommendations should be reflected in the LSWMP,
Appendices ...
Appendix A - Please include RCWD stormwater permitting authority under WMO responsibility. ..
.
Arden HlIls Draft SWMP - 3
e
Appendix B - Please include the newly published "Minnesota Urban Small Sites BMP Manual",
prepared for the Metropolitan COill1cil by BARR Engineering, 2001 as a reference manuaL The
manual can be found on the Met Council's website (www.metrocounciLorg),
Appendix D - Please include the RCWD's full permit application, brochure materials, infiltration
checklist, and design guidelines,
The RCWD looks forward to the completion of the Arden Hills Local Stormwater Management Plan,
The District is most concerned with pretreatment of discharges into Rice Creek and Arden Hill's
water resources, the inclusion of alternative BMPs such as infiltration as a means of improving or
maintaining water quality, and the implementation of the feasibility studies found in the CIP,
Approval of this LWMP will be exclusive of the TCAAP property. The RCWD should be kept
updated on planning initiatives for this part of the City.
Please feel free to contact me (651.770,8448) with any questions,
Sincerely,
Jennifer Olson
Emmons & Olivier Resources
e cc:
Joe Lynch, Arden Hills, City Administrator
RCWD Administrator
Brett Emmons, EOR, RCWD Engineer
Helen Boyer, Met Council
e
e
e
e
February 20,2002
Ms. lennifer Olson
Emmons & Oliver Resources
clo Rice Creek Watershed District
3585 North Lexington Avenue, Suite 330
Arden Hills, Minnesota 55126-4196
RE: September, 2001 draft Local Storm Water Management Plan
Dear Ms. Olson:
The following is in response to your letter of November 26,2001 to Mr. 10el Schilling,
SEH, Inc. regarding comments on the City of Arden Hills draft Local Storm Water
Management Plan (LSWMP). We directed SEH, Inc. to incorporate appropriate
amendments to the draft Plan for consideration by the City Council. Enclosed is the final
Plan, The City Council directed staff to submit the Plan to Rice Creek Watershed District
for approval on February 19, 2002.
A summary of our responses to the issues raised in your letter follows below,
General
The City Council included the Water Quality Task Force's Final Report as an appendix to
the LSWMP. As an appointed body, the Task Force report is an important document that
includes recommendations for possible implementation by the City. The City Council
will implement those Task Force recommendations it deems both appropriate and cost
effective in the long-term.
Section 2 - Utilities
We have amended the Plan (Section 2, Utilities, page 21) addressing alternative designs
for conveyance systems other than storm sewer on a project-by-project basis.
Over the past thirty years, the City of Arden Hills implemented storm water pond
construction for developments in concert with Rice Creek Watershed District's
Watershed Plan. This action resulted in water quality improvement of its major
recreational lakes as recognized by the District (Lake 10sephine) and the City's Water
Quality Task Force Report. The USEPA report (EPA-82l-R-99-0l2) referenced in the
Letter to Ms, lennifer Olson
February 20, 2002
Page 2 of3
e
Plan and the City's experience indicate that storm water pond construction and associated
long-term maintenance costs are more cost effective that infiltration devices,
Notwithstanding, the Plan has been amended (Section 2, Utilities, paragraph four, page
21 and Section 3, Regional Storm water Treatment Locations, paragraph two, page 24)
recommending the use of alternative drainage systems and BMPs on a project by project
basis,
Section 3 - Hydraulic and Water Quality Analysis
Preparation of a figure depicting water quality treatment in the City's subwatersheds is
beyond the scope of the LSWMP preparation, We have amended Table 7 in the Plan
identifying the completion of a subwatershed evaluation study as detailed information is
lacking in the City (storm water routing, detention pond characteristics, etc.).
Section 4 - Objectives and Policies
The Wetland Conservation Act provision relating to storm water detention pond
phosphorus removal efficiency and wetland mitigation/replacement has been added under
the Ponds and Wetlands section of Objective F (page 33).
Section 5 - Implementation Program
e
The City will keep RCWD informed on the feasibility and implementation of the storm
water improvement projects identified in the LSWMP.
Cost/Benefit for Pollutant Removal
Table 9 did not include a column identifying pollutant removal capability for each
practice because the information was not included in the referenced USEPA document.
Similarly, the "Minnesota Urban Small Sites BMP Manual" does not include definitive
BMP removal efficiencies. We agree that both infiltration devices and storm water ponds
have demonstrated pollutant removal capabilities. However, the USEP A document (page
5-9) and the Center for Watershed Protection WEB sites (http://www,cwp,org/coJd-
climates.htm and http://www.stormwatercenter.net/Librarv/PracticeArticles.htm)
reference studies and cautionary statements on the long-term use and cost of infiltration
systems.
We have referenced the Minnesota BMP manual in the LSWMP (Section 3, Regional
Storm water Treatment Locations, page 24) along with including it as a reference in
Appendix M,
As discussed earlier, the Water Quality Task Force Report recommendations will be
implemented by the City where appropriate and in a cost-effective manner. The City will
continue to use storm water ponds as the BMP of choice with other alternatives
e
e
e
e
Letter to Ms, lelmifcr Olson
February 20,2002
Page 3 of3
implemented on a case by case basis. It would not be prudent for the City of Arden Hills
to abandon a BMP that has improved the water quality of its major recreational lakes and
resulted in low maintenance cost. Our experience has clearly shown a cost benefit in the
use of storm water ponds as a first choice option, In this regard, we applaud the RCWD
past requirements for such implementation,
Appendices
We have included those changes recommended in Appendices A, B, and D.
We appreciate the constructive criticism by Rice Creek Watershed District on the draft
LSWMP. The City of Arden Hills looks forward to the Districts' approval ofthe Plan
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 103B.235, Subdivision 4. Please contact loel
Schilling, SHE, regarding tbe timeline for the Plan approvaL Thank you for your time
and consideration.
Sincerely,
10e Lynch
City Administrator
Enclosure
C: 10el Schilling, SEH, Inc.
lanell Miersch, RCWD
- ~ -~, _._~~~~~~~~~-~ ~~ ~ ...- .-^~-~._- -.,-~
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
i,.,.L,
""-,.
"'~I
t;:;.:_
""'I
;,;.....,.~,;,..,-,.:.;,
,>'-.. '.'
;;-"~!i._'-.:
Arden Hills
Local Storm water
Management Plan
/
~"'~;("
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
SEH No. A-ARDEN0101.00
February, 2002
"=Sf"H
SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON INC
Multidisciplined,
Single Source.
I
~
'I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I,
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
Table of Contents
Page
Executive Summary ....,..................'..................................................................... 1
Section 1 - Introduction....................,...,..,....,...................................................,.. 3
Authorization and Need .....................,.....................,..................,..............." 3
Background....,..........,....,.,.............,...................................,..,....,..,....,.""..... 4
Purposes of Metropolitan Water Management Program ............................... 6
Plan Summary .............................................................................................. 6
Section 2 - Physical Environment ...................................................................... 8
Geology and Topography ................,.....................................................,....,.8
Soils....................................................,.........................................,...............8
Precipitation,...........,........,................. ........................................................... 11
Surface Water Resources.................,....................................................,..".. 12
Lakes and Other Significant Water Bodies ................................................... 15
Water Quality ............,......,.....................,......................,..,............................ 16
Utilities............. ................. .......................................................... ................,. 21
Water Appropriation Permits,.........................................,.............................. 22
Water-based Recreation Areas................................................................,.... 22
Unique Features and Scenic Areas .............................................................. 22
Pollutant Sources ........ ................................................ .................................. 22
Section 3 - Hydraulic and Water Quality Analyses ........................................... 24
Hydraulic Analyses .........,.............................................................................24
Water Quaiity Analyses.................................................................................27
Lakes and Ponds ...................................................,......................................27
Lake Josephine Assessment Report...,......................................................... 28
Section 4 - Objectives and Policies ................................................................... 30
General.. ................. ...................,....,.., ....................,.......,....................,.....". 30
Objectives and Policies.. ......................................................................,........ 30
Section 5 - Implementation.............................................................,...,................ 42
Introduction........ ........ .............,..,...............,........ ...... ...........,.............,.......... 42
Implementation Priorities.....................,..,.,................................ ................... 42
Cost/Benefit for Pollutant Removal...........................................................,.., 46
Amendment Procedures .......................................................,....................... 49
Request for Amendments ....................,..................................,..................... 49
A-ARDEN0101,OO
Page i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table of Contents (Continued)
Staff Review........ .........,.......,...."......,...,......................................,..,............. 49
Council Consideration ...,..,..........,................. .................... ......................'..... 49
Public Hearing, Council, and RCWD Approval.............................................. 49
Council Adoption, ............,....,....................... ,...... ......,...... ..... ....., ,...............,. 50
Annual Report to Council.,.....,...................................................................... 50
NPDES, Phase II ....................,.......,..,.............................................,............50
GIS ..................................,............,............,...............................,.................51
Table 1
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Table 5
Table 6
Table 7
Table 8
Table 9
Table 10
List of Tables
Summary of City Soil Groups ..........................................,.............,.....9
Rainfall in Minneapolis - SI. Paul Metropolitan Area ........................... 11
Lake Tier Classification ....................................................................... 15
Summary Data on Lakes in Arden Hills ............................................... 27
Advantages and Disadvantages of Different Funding Alternatives ......37
Arden Hills LSWMP Implementation Summary................................... 42
Capital Improvement Plan .............................................,..................... 43
Annual Operating Costs ......,..........,..................................,..............,.. 45
Capital and Maintenance Costs for BMP's .......................................... 47
Cost Estimate Comparison for Proposed Treatment Ponds ................48
List of Figures
Figure 1 - Location Map......,.................................................................................. 5
Figure 2 - Soils Map ..........................................,................................,.................. 10
Figure 3 - 100-Year, 24-hour Rainfall.........................................................,.......... 13
Figure 4 - Drainage Ditches....................................,.............................................. 14
Figure 5 - MN/DNR Protected Waters Inventory Map.,.......................................... 17
Figure 6 - National Wetland Inventory Map .........................,.................................18
Figure 7 - Storm Drainage System (Fold out in back pocket)
Figure 8 - Existing Land Use ........................................................................,........ 19
Figure 9 - Future Land Use.......,.............,..............................................................20
Figure 10 - Water Appropriation Permits ....,.......................................................... 23
Figure 11 - Proposed Regional Stormwater Treatment Locations ......................... 26
.
e
.
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101,OO
Page ii
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
Appendix E
Appendix F
Appendix G
Appendix H
Appendix I
Appendix J
Appendix K
Appendix L
Appendix M
Table of Contents (Continued)
List of Appendices
State of Minnesota Rules Governing Local Stormwater
Management Plans
Rainfall Frequency Atlas for the Midwest
"Comprehensive Drainage Survey Maintenance Plan and Ponding
Recommendations" and Final Report by Arden Hills Water Quality
Task Force
MPCA Pollutant Sources in Arden Hills
Pond Design Standards
Hydrologic Modeling and Water Quality Modeling Results Summary
Data from MPCA Lake Water Quality Assessment Program and
MDNR Lakes Database
Rice Creek Watershed District Rules, Permit Application, Infiltration
Checklist and Design Guidelines
Developer Guidelines
Regulatory Responsibilities
Maintenance and Water Quality Source Controls
Example Agreement (regarding Stormwater Management Practices
Water Quality Treatment Pond)
Best Management Practices (BMPs)
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page iii
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2,11.02
.
Arden Hills
Local Stormwater Management Plan
Executive Summary
Minnesota Statutes, Sections 103B.201 - 103B.255 and Minnesota Rule,
Chapter 8410 comprises the Metropolitan Surface Water Management
Program. The Statute and Rule requires the preparation of watershed plans by
watershed management organizations such as Rice Creek Watershed District.
Local water management plans must subsequently be prepared by the
respective local governments and be consistent with the watershed plan. The .
Arden Hills Local Storm Water Management Plan (LSWMP) has been
prepared according to State statutory and rule requirements.
The Plan is subdivided into five sections:
1. Introduction;
2. Physical Environment;
3, Hydraulic and Water Quality Analyses;
4, Goals, Policies, and Objectives; and
5. Implementation.
The Plan is consistent with the requirements of the Rice Creek Watershed
District.
The City of Arden Hills has seven lakes that are either partially or entirely
lying within City limits. Therefore, the lakes have always been a focus of the
City, and the protection of its water resources is a high priority. The City has
ordinance for shoreland protection, floodplain management and sediment and
erosion control in place.
Significant growth and development is not anticipated in Arden Hills, except
in the Twin Cities Army Ammunition Plant (TCAAP) property, which
occupies nearly one-third of the land area in the City. Over the next 20 years, .
TCAAP land is expected to be released from the federal government for
redevelopment.
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 1
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
.,
I
I
I
I
I
I
l'
I
2.11,02
Section 3 includes a summary of the hydraulic and water quality analyses
results, Both the hydraulic and the water quality models were completed for
the eleven proposed regional ponds that were identified in a previous
comprehensive drainage study, There were two more proposed regional ponds
that were identified in this study that are being completed as part of a TH 96
reconstruction project. The modeling did not include the entire City, and was
strictly focused on the proposed regional ponds.
The City is adopting the Objectives and policies of Rice Creek Watershed
District as their own. However, the Plan reflects specific objectives for the
City relating to maintenance, public education and participation and [mance,
which are included in Section 4.
Section 5 includes a summary of implementation strategies and priorities and
a capital improvement plan to address existing and future stormwater
management issues facing the City of Arden Hills.
The Arden Hills Local Stormwater Management Plan is intended to give
overall planning guidance to the City officials, staff, citizens and developers.
The information presented is an estimate of the ultimate conditions of the
City, The Plan should not, however, be used for final design of facilities.
Rather, it is intended to supplement City Planning and guide site-specific,
detailed analysis. As more information becomes available, the plan should be
regularly updated. In this way, Arden Hills stormwater management efforts
will remain dynamic and flexible.
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101,OO
Page 2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2,11,02
.
Section 1 - Introduction
Authorization and Need
Minnesota Statutes, Sections I03B.201 - 103B.255 and Minnesota Rule,
Chapter 8410 (Appendix A) comprises the Metropolitan Surface Water
Management Program. The Statute and Rule requires the preparation of
watershed plans by watershed management organizations such as Rice Creek
Watershed District. Local water management plans must subsequently be
prepared by the respective local governments and be consistent with the
watershed plan. The Arden Hills Local Storm Water Management Plan
(LSWMP) has been prepared according to State statutory and rule
requirements.
The boundaries of Arden Hills lie entirely within Rice Creek Watershed
District (RCWD). The watershed district updated their Water Resource
Management Plan in October, 1997. The City of Arden Hills is required to
submit their Local Stormwater Management Plan for review for consistency
with the updated RCWD plan. The City of Arden Hills has recently updated
its Comprehensive Plan, which must include the LSWMP as required by
Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.859, Subdivision 2, and be reviewed by the
Metropolitan Council.
e
The City of Arden Hills is only a small part of the Minneapolis - St. Paul
metropolitan area, The nature of physical development and redevelopment
within Arden Hills, its nature resources, people, economy and government
plan must all be placed in context with what is happening in the larger
metropolitan area, particularly the metropolitan area in the immediate vicinity
of Arden Hills. The cities in the metropolitan area are increasingly impacted
by environmental concerns. These concerns include loss of wetlands, lake and
river water quality, wastewater treatment, groundwater protection, shoreland
development, and construction erosion and sedimentation problems. The
impact of these environmental concerns affects recreational opportunities,
aesthetic considerations, and also affects ecological diversity and wildlife
habitat.
Often city councils and their respective staffs are under varied pressure from
homeowners, park and recreational users, land developers, real estate agencies
and environmental groups in their communities. Chapter 103B and the
political environment make water resource management planning an
important issue,
.
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101,OO
Page 3
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
lit
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
2,11,02
Background
The land that became the City of Arden Hills was originally part of Mounds
View Township. The area was fIrst settled in the mid-1800s. In 1906, 10seph
Hackney, a State senator and millionaire, settled on the land and built Arden
Farms, This farm and the terrain would eventually give the City its name, In
1951, the City of Arden Hills was created,
The City of Arden Hills is located in Ramsey County, approximately eight
miles north of the downtown areas of Minneapolis and St. PauL It is bordered
on the north and east by Shoreview, the west by Mounds View and New
Brighton, and the south by Roseville. The City of Arden Hills is bordered by
County Road 1 to the north, Lexington Avenue to the east, Interstate 35W to
the west, and partially by County Road D to the south. The City's area covers
approximately 9.4 square miles. The Twin Cities Army Ammunition Plant
(TCAAP) occupies approximately 4 square miles of the northern portion of
the City, or nearly one-third of the entire land area of Arden Hills. Over the
next 20 years, TCAAP land is expected to be released by the federal
government to be redeveloped. Site contamination clean up will determine
rate of land release. See Figure 1 for location map.
The lakes have always been the focus of the Arden Hills' community. There
are seven lakes that lie entirely or partially within the City limits. Lake
Johanna is the largest lake in the City, covering approximately 230 acres.
There are also public ditches and wetland complexes throughout the City. The
City falls entirely under the jurisdiction of Rice Creek Watershed District.
The southern portion of Arden Hills is fully developed, The TCAAP land in
the northern portion of the City, will be redeveloped in the future. The
redevelopment of TCAAP will have a significant impact on the future nature
of the City. The TCAAP Framework Plan includes preserving nearly one-half
of the area in its natural state, public parks, mixed residential and mixed
business use. A large portion of the City is residential, but Arden Hills also
consists of lakes and parks, and serves as home to many businesses of
multiple sizes, along with two private colleges. The City of Arden Hills aims
to maintain its existing residential neighborhoods, strengthen its commercial
and industrial areas, and incorporate the redevelopment of TCAAP into the
City's long range planning.
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
+
~ , ~ '; ~. u "j
;~-\v r\ LJ
;~ jt-"":____._. --!l.____.:...J . '!!t. .; : (h
J - '\.. . 1 ~? -..;-- ..------..--.' <;:J
, '-'_ I I ;-;;(~// i ;
'_~ ,~.-.// )'1' 10
, ,,' ,"",,' . [) '- ( \ "II, . "
.' '.' :"" .... ~ . . .... . /"/1,'" '. I "', ,"
, n'f' ..1 ", I1:JJ..> '9/" ."" ".'
. -Xc:. ~~': i. ~clO<' ;;.':> tlJ\ ~:"S
, ,,) ~' '(. '~; j'~~l"~,r..~ -10 1'1: ~" 'Uo
',:,,:~~:;:;, ~,..""., i;lll~~ -I ," J~
1_ - (:: I~ ::)1 l?~'~;'f '?~o <<-,,,y;r '~~
. i, ; :':;- .,t.. ,.","', I :dt:l"' :t" · ~ "", \
~" :~ .' " :JfQ." ~~:,~, · :i. ;~~~!rlJ'L;~~M
, ..r~ ' , ' , .-I I, ~ ' ' 'Go 1 ~' ). <l if A '10 Q
i,l..:, \)1' ("11 ;r' ,:f:r a' ,IF- II, [- T .~:~
, j_' , '~"f"",:>)l' V ~,'" '? 'ilD ,v:<-
~ .. -, 1_ 'I " " I I ROSEViLLE Ii: ~; (;; - r ~', r',,:i.,.'
~ ,_ 'I ' ,"..-.'.. ". i' ... ,,\
"1'';''\1'. '/d\t~ . 1<s::,I~ll>'I2,(~'J">':o;",
I--I.c_!!y OF A RDEN HILLS V " , ,. ~ . " ' ' ~ I, , .1 '"\~.. '. '. r;' '
. '" ;;_r:::"-'T~~f'~ . I" i\., " ,.,1, :' . ,
1 ':; ~I~'" ., ~K ~M';" 1.:r"PA~}:j- . '.i~.,
,. . '...." I "'NNEAPOLlS I ' . '::::: .... -, ~ ..,::1' ..;':' ~ i\' ,
~r;::: .. "T'~"'X"':' .i4<;;"=.,k.'; -10;1,..
hAI r'" -I ".~ \. 1'< ,'/3i ',,\ \~\.;. .
,>~ 10, .1' j'~' ....,.,.. i' [:)"'a.6::: '\~' I,,{,' \",' .
~' \. '. In., . ~.__-/r ___:..._ ~!. ,"-.."" \ I IJ .
,'L.. ;' J ::i,!l.. ,,/ A\ ", ' . . 0: '\ .",', /b' .'
NOT TO SCALE
SOURCE: MN/D
9/2001
A~SBi
FILE NO.
AARDEN010l.00
FIG NO,
1
Location Map
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
tI
I
I
I
I
I
I
'-
I
I
2,11,02
Purposes of Metropolitan Water Management Program
The purposes of the water management programs required by Minnesota
Statutes sections 103B.205 to I03B.255 are to:
1. protect, preserve and use natural surface and groundwater storage and
retention systems;
2. minimize public capital expenditures needed to correct flooding and water
quality pro blems;
3. identify and plan for means to effectively protect and improve surface and
groundwater quality;
4. establish more uniform local policies and official controls for surface and
groundwater management;
5. prevent erosion of soil into surface water systems;
6. promote groundwater recharge;
7. protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat and water recreational
facilities; and
8. secure the other benefits associated with the proper management of
surface and groundwater.
The intent of the Local Stormwater Management Plan is to gather all essential
information and planning data into a single document which describes the
existing environment, establishes specific policy and management methods
for protection and future enhancement of the City's water and wetland
resources, while recognizing the need for proper land utilization and growth.
The Plan has been prepared in conformance with the criteria set forth in the
Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) Water Resource Management Plan.
The criteria, as a minimum, establish the degree of performance necessary to
achieve improvement in water quality and quantity management. These
criteria are not intended to dictate or preempt the design process, but rather
provide guidelines to proper development.
Plan Summary
The Arden Hills Local Stormwater Management Plan includes the elements
required by Minnesota Statutes Chapter 103B, the Metropolitan Council's
guidelines for Water Management Plans which include the requirements
found in Minnesota Rules, Chapter 8410, and the requirements set forth in the
RCWD Water Resource Management Plan. The Plan includes identification of
and recommendations for protection and maintenance of the existing
hydrologic system, the goals and policies for water quality and quantity,
erosion and sediment control, recreation, fish and wildlife enhancement, and
an implementation program with a process for Plan amendment. The Plan
supplements the Watershed District's Plan, creating a rational, efficient local
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
A-ARDEN010l.00
Page 6
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2,11,02
management approach, By minimizing
enhancing water quality, the City will
resources,
public capital expenditures and
best manage its important water
e
e
e
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Water Resource Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 7
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.-
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
2.11,02
Section 2 - Physical Environment
Geology and Topography
Arden Hills is located in Ramsey County, which is dominated by the Eastern
St. Croix Moraine, This glacial and terminal moraine is characterized by steep
hills interspersed with deep depressions. The depressions are occupied by
small lakes or are filled with peat.
The topography of the City is relatively diverse, with undulating to steep
slopes. The highest point in Ramsey County is located in Arden Hills, on the
TCAAP property. The entire City is ultimately tributary to Rice Creek.
Detailed descriptions of the City's bedrock geology can be obtained from the
Rice Creek Watershed District. In addition, the Minnesota Geological Survey
can provide maps detailing the bedrock hydrogeology of Minnesota,
addressing rock formations and aquifers.
Soils
Most of the soils within Arden Hills are glacial tills. The soils tend to be well
drained, and moderately coarse textured.
The main source of information on existing soils found within the. City of
Arden Hills was prepared by the Natural Resource Conservation Service
(NRCS). The NRCS has established four general types of soil groups based on
texture and slope as described below:
. Group A - Low runoff potential, high infiltration
. Group B - Moderate infiltration
. Group C - Slow infiltration rate
. Group D - Very slow infiltration rate, high runoff potential
The runoff potential of an area is determined using these general soil
characteristics in combination with land use classifications, vegetation of the
area and rainfall intensity determined from charts for the various design
storms.
A summary of the soil group classifications in Arden Hills can be found in
Table 1. Figure 2 is a soils map for the City,
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101,OO
Page 8
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2,11,02
Table 1
Summary of City Soil Groups
e
Soil Group Percentage of Total
A 5.7%
NO 5,9%
B 28.7 %
BID 1.7 %
C 0,1 %
CIO 1.6%
0 2.8%
Urban 41.7%
Water 8.3%
Unknown 3.5 %
Urban land general consists of fill that has been placed in urban areas, It tends
to not fit under a soil group. Areas where the land was unable to be surveyed
fall under the "unknown" category, due to the inability to classify the soil
groups.
e
e
City ot Arden Hills. Minnesota
Local Water Resource Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 9
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.-
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
N
+
2000
I
o 2000 Feet
I
LEGEND
D Water
Soil Groups
_A
Ji;i;l AID
_B
_BID
DC
_C/D
DD
DURB
_ Unknown
SOURCE: RAMSEY COUN
9/2001
Soils Map
FILE NO.
AARDEN010l,QO
FIG NO.
2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2.11,02
Soil characteristics are also considered when developing erosion control plans.
Special procedures for erosion and sediment control should be incorporated
into all construction projects, The erosion control handbook published by
Board of Water and Soils Resources (BWSR) includes recommended
management practices. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA)
published in 2000 a document titled Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas,
Best Management Practices for Dealing with Storm Water Runoff from
Urban, Suburban and Developing Areas of Minnesota, which may be used for
reference or its replacement document when it is approved, This manual can
be found on the WEB at http://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/pubs/sw-
bmpmanual.html. The Ramsey County Soil Erosion and Sediment Control
Handbook (1989) may also be used for erosion protection guidance.
Precipitation
Climate within the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area is described as a
humid continental climate with moderate precipitation, wide daily temperature
variations, warm humid summers and cold winters. The total average annual
precipitation is approximately 29 inches. The average annual snowfall is
approximately 50 inches, which is equivalent to roughly five inches of water.
Rainfall data for the Minneapolis - St. Paul metropolitan area is shown in
Table 2.
Table 2
Rainfall in Minneapolis - St. Paul Metropolitan Area
(inches)
Return 24-hour 12-hour 6-hour 3-hour 2-hour 1-hour 30 - 15 -
Frequency minute minute
1-year 2,3 2.0 1.7 1,5 1.4 1,2 0,9 0,6
2-year 2.8 2.4 2,1 1,7 1.7 1.4 1.1 0,7
5-year 3,6 3.1 2.7 2.3 2.2 1,8 1.4 1.0
10-year 4,2 3.7 3,1 2,6 2,5 2.1 1,7 1,3
25-year 4,6 4.2 3,5 3,0 2.8 2,3 1.9 1.4
50-year 5.3 4,6 4,0 3.4 3.1 2,7 2,1 1,5
100-year 5.9 5,0 4.4 3,8 3.5 2,9 2.4 1.7
The IOO-year, 24-hour rainfall for the State of Minnesota is shown in Figure
3. The table and figure indicate climatological information found in the U,S.
Department of Commerce, Weather Bureau Technical Paper No. TP-40,
Another good resource for rainfall data is the Rainfall Frequency Atlas for the
Midwest published by the Midwestern Climate Center and Illinois State Water
Survey, A table from this resource can be seen in Appendix B.
City of Arden Hills. Minnesota
Local Water Resource Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101,OO
Page 11
e
.
.
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
III
I
I
I
I
I
I
\t
I
I
2.11.02
The 24-hour duration, NRCS Type II rainfall distribution with average soil
moisture conditions (AMC-2) will be used for overall subwatershed planning
within the City of Arden Hills.
Surface Water Resources
Drainage Ditches
The City of Arden Hills has public ditches within the City limits. Most of the
ditches in the RCWD were constructed primarily to drain land for agricultural
purposes. Ramsey County Ditch 4 drains into Little Johanna Lake and
subsequently outlets into Lake 10hanna. Ramsey County Ditch 4 flows from
the south end of the City towards the northwest. Ramsey County Ditch 12
flows east-west through the central part of the City. Valentine Lake drains into
Ramsey County Ditch 12. Figure 4 shows the approximate location of these
ditches. For exact locations the ditches should be surveyed.
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
A-ARDEN01 01,00
Page 12
..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t:..5. DEPART),(EblT OF AGRICULTURE
".
+
+
MINNESOTA SO[L CONSERVATION SERVICE
". ~. .r '" '" ".
+ + + + + + .
r .,
IOO-YEAR 24-HOUR RAINF ALLCINCHES)
...
,4.8 ~r ~
"F~
~-- i~~-- _J \,
~-- -5':0- T.::=.-LJJl:'''-
11l(l_ fl:........~
I . ~,
I ~- I \ ,-...
t=- v.....,., 'l
~ 5.1 'I -,,-.-/1- '--------v
- ,
I
+
+
+
.;-
+
..
+ +
e
.. + + + ..
+
I 5.7
+
+
+
,.
...
'"
+
+
..
.;-
SOURCE: USWB TP 40
", .
":R~ .. ..
+
+
+
.
"
+
...
55'
..
".
".
.,.
l;I'I;I..S;s..LI";O~". Ifnlt. I'll
1-9
FIGURE 3
~-t..40gel
.'
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.-
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
N
+
2000
,
o
2000 Feet
,
LEGEND
............. County Ditches
. ~ Water
C-X County Ditch 10
-
~
~SeJ
o
NOTE: DITCH LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE.
SOURCE: RCWD AND CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
9/2001
Drainage Ditches
FILE NO.
AARDENOl 01 ,00
FIG NO.
4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2.11,02
Lakes and Other Significant Water Bodies
Residents of Arden Hills enjoy a high quality of uatural resources with
numerous lakes and wetlands within the City limits. There are seven lakes
which lie entirely or partially within the City limits of Arden Hills: Lake
Johanna, Lake losephine, Little Lake lohanna, Valentine Lake, Round Lake,
Karth Lake and Sunfish Lake. RCWD has prioritized lakes within the district
on the basis of trophic state indices, recreational facilities and lake capability,
Tier I lakes consistently support swimming. Tier 2 lakes are capable of
supporting swimming or have significant public uses. Tier 3 waterbodies
include all DNR protected lakes, wetlands, and watercourses not included in
Tiers I and 2, Tier 4 includes any remaining wetlands, stormwater basins, and
conveyance systems. The following table lists the tier identification of the
lakes within the City of Arden Hills, according to the Rice Creek Watershed
District Water Resource Management Plan.
Table 3
Lake Tier Classification
Lake Tier
Johanna 2
Josephine 2
Karth 3
Little Johanna 3
Round 3
Sunfish 3
Valentine 3
The RCWD Plan does not lists any Tier 1 water bodies in Arden Hills,
However, additional water quality data collection and analysis by the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency would indicate that Josephine Lake
would be considered a Tier I lake (Section 3, Water Quality Analyses).
The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Protected Waters which lie
within the City limits can be seen in Figure 5. The DNR Protected Water
comprise watercourses such as Rice Creek, lakes and wetlands greater than
2.5 acres. The DNR has jurisdiction over these protected water bodies at and
below the Ordinary High Water (OHW) level The OHW is defIned as the
elevation delineating the highest water level which has been maintained for
sufficiently long periods of time to leave evidence upon the landscape.
Figure 6 shows the wetlands within the City of Arden Hills that are included
in the National Wetlands Inventory (NWl) prepared by the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (1991), Areas shown on the DNR and NWl maps indicate the
presence of wetlands, but show only the general location of wetlands. Site
City 01 Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Water Resource Management Plan
A.ARDEN0101,OO
Page 15
.
.
e
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
2,11.02
visits for delineation of wetland boundaries are required for permitting. It
should be noted that some of these wetlands may have been created as
stormwater detention basins in conjunction with urban development.
Arden Hills has many public waters within the City. The lakes and wetlands
provide an environmental habitat for fish and wildlife within the City. These
water bodies should be protected from degradation by pollution or
contamination from surface water or groundwater sources.
Storm Drain System
The existing drainage system for Arden Hills is shown in Figure 7. A further
investigation of the thirteen proposed regional ponds that were determined in
the "Comprehensive Drainage Survey Maintenance Plan and Ponding
Recommendations" that was completed by BRW, Inc, in May, 1999, has been
completed. See Appendix C.
Water Quality
Land Use
The area south of Highway 96 is developed for the most part. TCAAP, in the
northern portion of the City, is the only large area that will be redeveloped
within the City. Arden Hills is a fairly stable community, and foresees
minimal amount of development and population growth in the next 5 to 10
years. It is difficult to predict the redevelopment that will occur in the City
until the land release of TCAAP. Disregarding the TCAAP area, the majority
of the City of Arden Hills is residential. There are also many large
corporations, various sized businesses, two private colleges, and parks and
open areas in the City. Figure 8 shows existing land use, while the potential
future land use is shown in Figure 9.
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Slormwater Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 1 6
I
N ~--"--r€~
I +
--../~--
I )-
- Q
-.
')
I b
I
I ARDEN HILLS
~ Itl"
I +
I .'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I ..
.
I ',.:
NOT TO SCALE
SOURCE: DNR
I 9/2001
;sm FILE NO.
Mn/DNR Protected Waters AARDEN010l.00
I Inventory Map FIG NO.
5
I
'Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.-
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
N
+
2000
,
o 2000 Feet
,
LEGEND
Wetland Classification
_ Type 1
_ Type 2
_ Type 3
_ Type 4
_ Type 5
_ Type 6
_ Type 7
1 ....>1 Type 8
_ Industrial/Municipal
_ Riverine
D Upland
/\I Waterline
~etJ
SOURCE: U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
9/2001
National Wetland
Inventory Map
FILE NO.
AARDEN010l.00
FIG NO.
6
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2,11,02
As areas develop and redevelop, stOlIDwater runoff increases. Roofs,
driveway, parking lots, and other impervious surfaces increase the amount of
runoff and decrease the amount of soil infiltration associated with this area.
.
The City of Arden Hills has 15 parks within its City limits totaling
approximately 350 acres, The City intends to maintain these park areas, make
necessary improvements to the park system, and continue to expand the trail
system to connect the neighborhoods to these parks and other trails, The parks
are a vital part of the Arden Hills community.
Arden Hills has a DNR-approved shoreland ordinance. It is important that the
shoreland of lakes be protected and developed in a manner consistent with the
Minnesota DNR management standards in order to maintain or improve the
quality of the water bodies within the City.
Utilities
Public utilities in Arden Hills include sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and the
water di~tribution system.
Sanitary sewer interceptor and treatment is provided to the City via the
Metropolitan Council Environment Services (MCES) system, The City's
Sanitary Sewer Utility has jurisdiction over the sanitary sewer collection
system within the City's borders. There are currently 20 lift stations that exist
in the City.
The St. Paul Water Utility provides drinking water to Arden Hills through the
City of Roseville. Once in the City, the City's Water Utility has jurisdiction
over the system. There are only two areas in the City that are not served by the.
City water service. The fIrst is the Old Highway 10 area (Highway 96 to
Wedgewood Circle), which consists of single family homes, is served by
private wells, The second is TCAAP with its own water supply facility. At
this time the City does not know how to most effectively provide water
service to the TCAAP area once redevelopment occurs.
e
Currently, storm drainage is provided through a combination of open ditches
and storm sewer in the City of Arden Hills, The entire City of Arden Hills is
not served with storm sewer. According to the City's 1998 External Review
Copy of the Comprehensive Plan (page 93), the City requires storm sewer to
be installed with the reconstruction of streets. This policy may not always be
feasible or practical, so alternate design standards may be used when
appropriate, such as drainage ditches, This will be addressed on a project - by-
project basis.
e
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Water Resource Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101,OO
Page 21
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.-
I
I
I
I
I
I
~e
I
I
2,11,02
Water Appropriation Permits
There are 32 water appropriation permits issued by the DNR in the City of
Arden Hills, Water appropriation permits are issued to the permittees who
pump greater than 10,000 gallons per day or over one million gallons of water
per year, The locations of the City's water appropriation permits can be seen
in Figure 10.
Groundwater Resource Data
Ramsey County published The Ramsey County Ground Water Quality
Protection Plan: A Guide to Preventing Ground Water Contamination For
Local Governments in 1994. The Plan identifies ground water contaminated
areas and predicts areas that are potentially susceptible to ground water
contamination. It also contains a comprehensive topographic and geological
overview describing ground water aquifers in the County.
Approximately 60-70% land area within the City is identified as having a
"moderate sensitivity" to ground water pollution (Ramsey County, Figure
3,06-1, page 3-21). As discussed within the above Utilities section, the 51.
Paul Water Utility provides municipal water to the City of Arden Hills. Thus,
development of a well-head protection area plan would not be necessary.
Water-based Recreation Areas
There are two major water-based recreation areas within the City of Arden
Hills. Ramsey County's redeveloped Tony Schmidt Regional Park is on the
north side of Lake Johanna and includes a swimming beach and boat ramp.
Ramsey County's Lake 10sephine Park also has a swimming beach and
concrete boat access off Lexington Avenue, ,
Unique Features and Scenic Areas
The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources maintains a database of
unique and sensitive plant and animal species.
According to the RCWD Water Resource Management Plan the Blandings
Turtle (Emydoidea Blandingii), which has received a "threatened status" in
the State of Minnesota, has been found within the City limits.
Pollutant Sources
The MPCA maintains lists of the generators of hazardous waste, above ground
and underground storage tanks, and leaking underground storage tanks, The
list is provided in Appendix D.
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 22
.
TWIN em
ARMY
1TI0
PLANT
.
".'-"
un
.
County Rd. 0
~
~~HILLS
Existing
Land Use
Map
Legend
Existing Land Use
c=J $FD: Single Family Detached Residential
c=J SFA: Single Family Attached Residential
c=J MF: Multiple Family Residential
.. MH: Mobile Home
[______J NC: Neighbomood CommerCial
c==J CC: Community Commercial
.. Re. Regional Commercial
.. He. Highway Convenience
.. OFe: Office
r- I L1:Lightlndustrial
r,';Jr~1 HI Heavy Industrial
c=J IN:lnsliluitional
L_ J SRC: Outdoor Sport/Recreation
.. OSN: Natural Open Space
.. asp: Passive Open Space
.. RR: Rail Road
.. UTL:Utility
.. VAC . Vacant
1":0:::1 Water features
I 'Right-Of-W,y
Oisdaimcl:'
1M Comprelumsiv" P!~n De.,ignu/iorJs,.,.
p'"f'3emmQnlhi3mapcon"'ifXJndJo,"eO,y
Q(Ardenl!ill"PoIi,yjotwnd/JseManogm"..t.
Qt'~SliM< cDnrcming Ille Ulnd Use Mill'
.<Nwldl",di",,:I;:d/{}I!rer'il)'!!jAnknffi!l,
IAndU...:IJe.0gt1atlon<IIteSIIOjc'ctrochmlK!'.
I,I"a.'"'4n'1(i,h"r'iN"fn"i1~n.<iveI'ItJnfr}J
complele f.andU,.. Desniplioll'
N
+
"m""~
R.,n,,"v[\u')'
CilYQ!'Aro,.",IiII,
2000
o
2000 Feet
Map Date' December 20, 2001
.
.
~
~~ HILLS
FUTURE LAND USE
Legend
Future Land Use
e LOR: Low Density Residential
e MDR: Medium Density Residential
. - HDR: High Density Residential
CJ MR: Mixed Residential
- NB: Neighborhood Business
- COM: Commercial
~
-..--- MB: Mixed Business
CJ INO: Industrial
CJ P\I: Public & Institutional
CJ Park
- Park Preserve
= Right~of.Way
L _I Water
Discl~imel
7'h"r{J1/~lJekn.,iwPlanfJe>ilJ'1ario"sre-
fiJ_J"Monrhi,,,,,,pco,,,,,spondlolheCily
of;lnJenliilhPolityfilrJ.MdUseManog""m"
QueiJio'lSC01ICemillglhoi...ndUseMap
,}wlJldhedirecwdlOlheCiI)'ojAI-denlJills
1-,<'lId!AeDr.esi;;narirmsaresuhjeClloch""ge,
p/m\'eriferlrJlheCoRlprehellsNel'lanfOl"
W'IJp!oleumd U,e De''''/;/",{}m
N
+
~Ut'"''
1I."""y(;o"""
C;ly"f,\nl....,!-I;lh
2000
o
2000 Feet
Map Dale December 20, 2001
.'
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
"
I
I
I
I
I
I
'-
I
I
N
+
2000
o
2000 Feet
LEGEND
;;;: -~c'r .-C""""~ ~, -_.~-_._;
(;_~~_\,;1 c;~,
~ Water
. - Water Appropriation Permit Locations
SOURCE: Mn/DNR
9/2001
Water Appropriation Permits
FILE NO.
AARDEN010l.00
FIG NO.
10
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2,11,02
Section 3 - Hydraulic and Water Quality Analyses
Hydraulic Analyses
Regional Stonnwater Treatment Locations
There are thirteen proposed potential regional ponds in Arden Hills that were
identified in a 1999 comprehensive drainage study by BRW Inc. (Dames and
Moore Group Company). TCAAP property was not considered or modeled as
part of this Plan, Two ponds within TCAAP, P-1 and P-l3, will be completed
as part of the reconstruction of TH 96, and will not be discussed in this Plan.
Figure II shows the approximate locations of the proposed regional ponds.
They are mostly located in natural low lands or inlets to lakes. It should be
noted that the City would need to further investigate the proposed regional
pond locations with respect to jurisdictional wetlands and regulatory
restrictions that may affect the construction of these facilities. Even though the
BRW, Inc. study and this Plan evaluate the proposed construction of regional
ponds, other stormwater treatment best management practices (such as
infiltration BMP' s) will be addressed in the feasibility study stage.
The Minnesota Urban Small Sites EMP Manual (Metropolitan Council, 2001)
outlines a three-step process to select a BMP or combination of BMP's for
sites less than five acres, This process looks at stormwater treatment
suitability, physical feasibility factors, and community and environmental
factors,
Summary Discharge Data
HydroCAD@ modeling was completed for the eleven proposed regional ponds.
At this stage the ponds are only concepts, and therefore the modeling
consisted of the drainage districts identified in the 1999 comprehensive
drainage study by BRW, Inc. and the proposed concept pond. The concept
pond was assumed to be rectangular in shape, with a ten-foot shelf below the
normal water level, side slopes of 3:1 everywhere else, and a depth of six feet.
Appendix E includes pond design standards for the City,
The 5, 10, and 100-year, 24-hour, storms were run, using antecedent moisture
conditions II. The results ofthese models can be seen in Appendix F.
The 100-year design storm was used to calculate a peak height of the pond
and to determine if any potential damage or flooding could occur at the
neighboring structures. Only one pond as calculated from this modeling, P-12,
has the potential for flooding the low point on North Hamline Avenue and
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 24
e
e
e
I
'e
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
"
I
I
I
I
I
I
It
I
I
2,11,02
will need more detailed analysis during the feasibility study/design stage to
ensure no damage to the surrounding structures will occur.
In addition to the HydroCAD modeling, stormwater quality and treatment
modeling was undertaken using the P8 Urban Catchment model.
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Water Resource Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101,OO
Page 25
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
N
+
2000
,
o
2000 Feet
LEGEND
D Drainage Boundaries
D Proposed Stormwater Treatment
-] Water
~eJ
~
SOURCE: 6RW, INC. (A DAMES AND MOORE GRO
9/2001
Proposed Regional Stormwater
Treatment Locations
FILE NO.
AARDEN0101.00
FIG NO.
11
I
'e
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
"
I
I
I
I
I
I
'-
I
I
2,11.02
Water Quality Analyses
P-8 models were created for the proposed regional ponds. The ponds were
designed to meet NURP (Nationwide Urban Runoff Program) standards,
which are removal of 90% of total suspended solids (TSS) and 65% of total
phosphorus (TP). As with the hydrologic modeling, no upstream drainage
areas were used in the water quality modeling, The ponds were modeled
using only the immediate drainage areas, Therefore, it is recommended to
model the entire drainage system during either a feasibility study or final
design to calculate the pollutant removal efficiencies of the entire system. The
results from the P-8 models can be found in Appendix F.
Lakes and Ponds
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and Minnesota Department
of Natural Resources (MDNR) maintain lake information databases on many
lakes in Minnesota. The data is available on the WEB at
bUD:/ /www.Dca.state,mn.us/waterl1akeaua\itv,btml and www,(lnr,stllte,mn,l1s/laketind,btm\,
Summary water quality data is available for all the lakes in Arden Hills except
Sunfish Lake (no data) on the TCAAP property. This lake has the potential to
be studied and monitored as part of the redevelopment of TCAAP, The
information from the MPCA's database, as of August 2001, can be found in
Appendix G. Table 4 provides summary data on the each of the lakes in
Arden Hills.
Table 4
Summary Data on Lakes in Arden Hills
Trophic
Lake Name MDNR Surface State Recreational
Number Area Index Suitability
(TSn
Josephine 62 - 57 109 acres 51 Full Support (M)
Round 62 - 70 122 acres 54 Full Support (M)
Valentine 62 - 71 60 ac res 65 Non-Supported
Karth 62 - 72 15 acres 66 Non-Supported
Johanna 62 - 78 230 acres 54 Partial Support
Little Lake Johanna 62 - 58 18 acres 85 Non-Supported
Trophic State Index (TSI) combines measures of summer Secchi Disk
transparency and epilimnetic (upper portion of lake characterized by warmer
and lighter water) concentrations of chlorophyll-a and total phosphorus to
come up with the value. The index ranges from 0 to 100, with the higher
values indicating more eutrophic (over nourished) conditions in the lake. For
the ecoregion Arden Hills is located in, typically a TSI value of less then 59
fully supports swimming. Swimming is partially supported between a TSl
value of 60 and 65.
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Water Resource Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101,OO
Page 27
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2,11,02
10sephine and Round lakes both fully support swimmable use classification,
according to their TSl, although they are sensitive to increases in phosphorus
nutrient loading. However, there is no access to Round Lake for swimming
use. Lake Johanna only partially supports swimmable use classification due to
algae blooms and low transparency for a significant portion of the summer.
Karth, Little Lake 10hanna and Valentine lakes do not support swimmable use
classification due to severe and frequent algae blooms and low transparency
for most of the summer. Round, Karth, Little Lake Johanna and Valentine
lakes have either small surface areas or are quite shallow in average depth and
therefore would not be considered likely candidates for swimmable use.
However, water quality data in support or non-support of this use is important
for wildlife management of these water bodies.
Lake Josephine Assessment Report
The MPCA along with MDNR, Ramsey County Public Works, RCWD and
10sephine Lake Association issued a Lake Assessment Report for 10sephine
Lake in 1998. Pertinent portions from that report are as follows:
(page iii)
A good historical data base is available for assessing trends in water
quality of Lake 10sephine. These data include 22 years of Secchi data
and several years of water chemistry data. Based on an analysis of 22
years of CLMP, MPCA, DNR, Met. Council, Ramsey County, and two
environmental consulting firm's Secchi transparency data, Lake
losephine exhibited a significant improvement in transparency over
time (R. = 0.52; p=0.0008). Summer mean Secchi transparency
measures ranged from 2.3 to 4.3 feet from 1975-1979. In contrast,
from 1981-1989 summer-mean Secchi ranged from 3.0 to 10,2 feet
and from 1990-1998 summer-mean Secchi ranged from 5.2 to 12.1
feet. Summer-mean total phosphorus and chlorophyll-a concentrations
exhibited a decline over this time period as well.
(page 3)
Lake 10sephine's watershed is relatively small at about 734 acres,
excluding the lake. The vast majority (96%) of the watershed is in
urban/residential lake use. This percentage, although not typical for
lakes in the North Central Hardwood Forest ecoregion, is rather typical
for lakes in the Twin Cities metro area. Little Lake 10sephine is about
12 acres in size, much of which is covered by cattails and emergent
vegetation; however, the open water portion has maximum depth of 25
feet. Originally, about 260 acres drained through Little Lake Josephine
prior to entering Lake 10sephine. In 1980, a project conducted by the
RCWD, in consultation with E.A. Hickok Engineering, resulted in an
additional 220 acres of direct drainage from Lake 10sephine watershed
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 28
e
e
.
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
'-
I
I
2.11,02
to Little Lake Josephine. As a result, about 480 acres (65%) drained
through Little Lake Josephine prior to entering Lake Josephine.
This would result in dramatic improvements in the quality of Lake
Josephine (emphasis added).
It is noted that only half of Lake Josephine is within the boundaries of the City
of Arden Hills while the remainder is within the City of Roseville. Also, the
RCWD storm sewer diversion project took place in Roseville. This
importance of this discussion is three-fold. First, a value judgement was made
by all agencies involved in the 1980 project that resulted in diverting storm
water from one public water into another for treatment. Second, Little Lake
10sephine has operated much like a NURP storm water detention pond and
thus has improved Lake 10sephine's water quality, Third and most important,
some of the proposed eleven ponds may involve existing wetlands similar, but
much smaller in surface area and depth than Little Lake Josephine, and their
use may come into play with implementation of the City's LSWMP.
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Water Resource Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 29
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2,11,02
.
Section 4 - Objectives and Policies
General
The City of Arden Hills is adopting the objectives and policies of the Rice
Creek Watershed District's (RCWD) Water Resource Management Plan of
1997 for the Local Stormwater Management Plan (LSWMP). In addition to
RCWD, the LSWMP reflects specific objectives relating to maintenance,
public education and participation, and fmance.
The objectives and policies are used as a guide in the design and construction
of private and public developments impacting water resources in the City.
They also address the routine operations of the City.
Objectives and Policies
An objective is a desired end toward which water management efforts are
directed. The fundamental objective of Rice Creek Watershed District Water
Resource Management Plan (1997) is "to provide for the wise, long-term
management of its water and associate land resources." This section of the
Arden Hills plan identifies the objectives for water resources planning and
management functions.
e
Each objective has several corresponding policies. Policies are governing
principles that provide the means for achieving established objectives.
RCWD's overall policy "provides an impartial, objective basis for developing
effective plans and programs for water resources management" (Rice Creek
Watershed District Water Resource Management Plan, 1997).
Rice Creek Watershed Distlict and the City will share authority over all water
resource issues within the City of Arden Hills, The City will reference the
RCWD rules, objectives and policies as their own, However, RCWD reserves
the right to approve local plan amendments and changes in local regulations,
The City will make sure private developers are aware of RCWD rules while
balancing the need to protect the health, safety and welfare of the community.
The RCWD's rules, permit application and other peltinent information can be
found in Appendix H. Developer guidelines can be found in Appendix 1.
.
City ot Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
A-ARDEN01 01 ,00
Page 30
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
2,11.02
The objectives and policies of RCWD are shown below along witb the City's
three additional objectives.
OBJECTIVE A: Minimize, the greatest possible extent, the public
expenditures necessary to control excessive volumes and
rates of runoff (RCWD).
A.1 Policy: Development to the year 2000 does not require
the need for measures to control runoff rate
unless necessary to prevent localized flooding.
A. 2 Policy: Provide for additional storage through the
construction of a comprehensive retention area
or by on-site ponding in the absence of a
comprehensive local/regional stormwater plan.
A. 3 Policy: To preserve the capacities of the present
drainage system to accommodate future needs.
OBJECTIVE B: Improve water quality (RCWD).
B. 1 Policy: Treat and/or control ruuoff to enhance water
quality to reverse the upward trends in
pollutants, especially nutrient and sediment
loads.
B. 2 Policy: To preserve wetlands which provide natural
treatment for runoff.
B. 3 Policy: To promote the local adoption of Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency individual wastewater
treatment system regulations.
B. 4 Policy: To improve the water quality monitoring system
for identifying potential problems.
B. 5 Policy: To protect drainage areas that supply the 81.
Paul and Minneapolis water system from sources
of contamination.
OBJECTIVE C: Prevent flooding and erosion from surface flows (RCWD).
C. 1 Policy: To prohibit encroachment that will reduce the
capacity of floodways and to allow only
structures in the flood fringe that have been
flood-proofed or that are not habitable
structures.
C. 2 Policy: To establish lOO-year flood levels based on
critical storm events.
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Water Resource Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101,OO
Page 31
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
2,11,02
C. 3 Policy: To promote the local adoption of floodplain
zoning ordinances confonning to state
regulations, as a minimum, to regulate
floodplain development.
C. 4 Policy: To minimize runoff velocities and maXlIluze
natural cover in order that erosion be reduced.
e
C.5 Policy: To provide all measures necessary to contain
sediment and control erosion within construction
sites.
OBJECTIVE D: Promote groundwater recharge (RCWD),
D. 1. Policy: To evaluate and control development of
groundwater recharge areas.
D. 2 Policy: To protect recharge areas from potential sources
of contamination.
OBJECTIVE E: Protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat and water
recreation (RCWD),
E. 1 Policy: To promote the adoption of local shoreland
ordinances based on Department of Natural
Resources regulations.
e
E. 2 Policy: To preserve wetlands that provide habitat for
game fish spawning and wildlife.
E. 3 Policy: To coordinate with the Department of Natural
Resources to enhance fish and wildlife habitats.
E. 4 Policy: To coordinate with the Department of Natural
Resources to protect rare and endangered
species.
E. 5 Policy: To coordinate with counties and municipalities
to enhance water-based recreation.
Rice Creek Watershed District will act as the Local Government Unit (LGU)
for the City with regards to managing the wetlands under the Wetland
Conservation Act. RCWD will also handle stormwater permitting for the City.
The City of Arden Hills has ordinances in place for shoreland management,
excavations, erosion and sediment control, and flood plain management. All
regulatory responsibilities, along with more information on the City's
ordinances can be seen in Appendix 1.
e
City of Arden Hills. Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 32
I
'-
I
I
I
I
I
E
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
2,1102
OBJECTIVE F: Pollution Control and Good Housekeeping for Municipal
Operations (AB).
F.l Policy: To irnplement routine maintenance measures
that reduce long-term capital improvement costs
related to the City's drainage system, while
achieving water quantity and quality goals.
Appendix K has resources on maintenance activities for both the City and the
residents. Below are the recommended maintenance and inspection activities
the City should undertake to ensure that their drainage system is performing
efficiently and effectively:
Stonn Sewers
1. Inspect storm sewer outfalls on an annual basis for evidence of scouring
or the presence of significant deposition of silt. Scouring problem areas
will be noted and stabilized. In areas where silt deposition is evident,
which is indicative of significant erosion upstream, an inspection of the
upstream watershed will be made to identify the source of erosion. Once
this erosion problem is determined, suitable corrective measure will then
be undertaken to correct the problem.
2. Review the salt/sand application policy for its balance with public safety
and environmental protection.
Ponds and Wetlands
3. Visually inspect stormwater retention and detention ponds every two
years to determine if the pond is performing adequately.
4. Conduct a pond bottom survey every ten years to determine required
"dead storage" volume. Once a pond has lost half of its dead storage
volume, the accumulated sediment should be removed from the pond,
5. A pond maintenance agreement with private pond owners shall be
required. This will ensure that private ponds are kept in good operating
condition and that routine maintenance occurs. See Appendix L for an
example agreement.
6. If a constructed storm water treatment basin is to be used for
replacement credit, the basin must be designed to retain at least 60
percent of the phosphorus loading from the runoff from a one-year, 24-
hour storm based on a fully developed tributary watershed. (Wetland
Conservation Act provisions [8420.0540]).
Street Sweeping
Street sweeping is most effective in removing coarse particles, sand, leaves,
debris, and other similar materials. It is recommended to have a semi-annual
street sweeping program, with the most beneficial sweeping is accomplished
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Water Resource Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101,OO
Page 33
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I,
I
I
I
I
I
2.11,02
early in the spring after snow melt, and in the fall after the leaves have fallen.
It has not been proven that sweeping the streets more than twice a year
provides a significant increase in sediment removal. So in terms of a
costibenefit ratio it does not make sense to sweep the streets more than twice a
year at this time.
.
There are two types of sweepers commonly used: vacuum sweepers and
mechanical broom sweepers. Vacuum sweepers are more effective for
removing fme particles, but are ineffective at cleaning wet surfaces.
Mechanical broom sweepers are effective at picking up large particles and
cleaning wet surfaces. They also cost less to operate than the vacuum
sweepers. However, mechanical broom sweepers generally create airborne
dust during their operation and are not effective in removing the fine particles.
OBJECTIVE G: Public Participation, Information, and Education (AR).
G.1 Policy: To increase public participation and knowledge
.in management of the water resources.
Water quality issues depend heavily on actions taken by private landowners.
The purpose of public participation, information and education efforts is to:
. Disseminate information regarding the Local Stormwater Management
Plan's (LSWMP) content; and
. Create SUPPOlt for the implementation of the LSWMP's goals and
policies.
RCWD does have a Technical and Citizen Advisory Committee that provides
education and information to the district community.
However, the City will provide its citizens with watershed education in
addition to RCWD. There are some educational opportunities that the City
may complete which are relatively inexpensive, yet reach out to the citizens of
Arden Hills.
.
The implementation may include, but is not limited to:
1. Publicize selected issues using the City newsletter
2. Publicize issues on the City web site and create links on the site to
other web sites which highlight water quality issues
3. Publicize selected issues using cable television.
4. Water billing t1yers.
5. Develop a stormwater stenciling/signage program
6.
e
Encourage the Lake Associations and other
participate in a lake protection plan process
lake homeowners to
City of Arden Hills. Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 34
I
\t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
III
I
i
I
i
"
I
~
I
2.11,02
By using the City newsletter, the City web site, and cable television to
publicize selected issues, more residents could be reached. The issues could
include a variety of water resource subjects including the use of phosphorous
fertilizers, information on the water quality of the lakes in the City, best
management practices (BMPs), and information of current water quality
improvement projects.
Web site links could include some of the same topics discussed on the web
site, cable television, and the City newsletter. The most beneficial approach
from the City would be to coordinate the topics on the web site and the
newsletter, and reference each other. Suggested links would be to the RCWD
homepage, report or articles on water quality protection, MPCA Lake
Assessment Site, and the MnlDNR Lakes Database which provides
information on the lakes in Minnesota including data from the water quality
monitoring and fishery information.
The stormwater stenciling program is a volunteer program that marks storm
sewer inlets with a notice indicating where the pipe outlets to. This may be
done with different mediums such as paint, decals or signs. According to the
Final Report-Arden Hills Water Quality Task Force- lunel2000, studies have
shown these programs has a 60% or better attention rate by the local residents.
This report can be seen in Appendix C.
OBJECTIVE H: Finance (AH).
H.t Policy: To use a wide array of funding sources and
financing approaches to support storm water
management programs.
Paying for water management projects has become more complex in recent
years, In the past, special assessments against benefited properties financed
most of the necessary improvements. However, the financial options have
broadened considerably. The question is, which methodes) best suit the needs
of the City,
The major categories of funding sources are 1) Ad Valorem Taxes 2) Special
Assessments 3) Development Charges [Building Permits, Land Development
Fees and Land Exaction] 4) Grants. The City does have a storm water utility
inplace, Following is a description and fmancing principles used with each of
these flllancing mechanisms.
Table 3 illustrates the advantages and disadvantages of the different financing
methods.
Ad Valorem Tax
General taxation is the most common revenue source used to fmance
government services including minor maintenance measures for drainage and
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Water Resource Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101,OO
Page 35
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2,11,02
water quality facilities. Using property tax has the effect of spreading the cost
over the entire tax base of a community.
e
A special tax district can also be used to raise revenue. The special tax district
is similar to the administrative structure under general taxation except that all
or part of the community may be placed in the tax district. The principle is to
better correlate improvement costs to benefited or contributing properties.
Special Assessments
Municipalities are familiar with the use of special assessments to fmance
special services from maintenance to construction of capital improvements.
The assessments are levied against properties benefiting from the special
services. The philosophy of this method is that the benefited properties pay in
relation to benefits received. The benefit is the increase in the market value of
the properties.
Development Charges
Fees charged to new development which generate runoff can be charged to
finance infrastructure needed to serve the development. This is a useful too I in
communities that are rapidly developing,
.
e
City of Arden Hiils, Minnesota
Locai Storm water Management Plan
A-ARDEN01 01 ,00
Page 36
I
Ie
I
.'
I
I
I
I
'.
I
lit
I
I
,
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
2.11.02
Table 5
Advantages and Disadvantages of Different Funding Alternatives
Funding Method Advantages Disadvantages
Ad Valorem Tax 1, Administrative structure for collection 1, No incentive to reduce runoff or
in place. pollution.
2. Simple and accepted source of 2, No relationship to level of benefits
revenue. received,
3. Allows for a larger revenue base. 3. Discontinuous source of revenue,
4, Contributors pay through tax districts. 4. Limitations on amount of
expenditures due to budget
constraints.
5, Competition with other City
services (Le" police, fire),
Special Assessments 1, Only benefited properties pay, 1. Rigid procedural requirements.
2. Revenues from assessment are 2. Runoff contributions cannot be
applied to a specific project cost. No assessed,
competition with general services. 3. Difficult to determine and prove
3, Benefits directly related to cost for benefit.
service. 4. May place an unfair burden on
4. Assessment can be deferred in some segments of the population,
hardshio cases,
Development 1, New development generating runoff 1, Only address problems within the
Charges pays for runoff management. vicinity of the new development,
2. Administrative structure for reviewing not usually existing developments,
plans and collecting fees is in place, 2. Only address prevention not
3, Systems can be tailored to the correction of major problems.
specific needs through regulatory 3. Limited usefulness as a financing
changes, mechanism, .
4, Revenues are applied to water 4. Limited new development pressure
management. No competition with within existing City limits.
general services.
Grants 1, Reduce cost burden to residents in 1. Undependable source of revenue,
the community. 2. Increase administrative costs for
securing and managing the funds.
3. Most often grants require cost
sharing and thus additional funding
source. This results in double
administrative costs due to severai
funding sources,
4, Limited avaiiability on an irregular
schedule,
5, Requires considerable lead time
from aDDlication to receivina funds.
City of Arden Hiils, Minnesota
Local Water Resource Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101,OO
Page 37
2,11,02
Grants
State grants are available for surface water management and non-point source
pollution. However, it is generally not a good financial practice to rely on
grants for a service program. This source of revenue is not dependable and
requires constant speculation as to its availability. Grants are useful but should
only be used to supplement a planned local revenue source. Examples of some
available grants include:
Environmental Protection Agencv (EP A): 604b - Urban Water Ouality Grant
The EPA's 604b Grant Program is targeted at water quality improvements in
urban areas. The grant is not a cost share program, but does require local
participation, The grant is generally administered through the state.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): Underground Injection Control
Pro gram
The U, S. Environmental Protection Agency's Underground Injection Control
(UIC) program involves inventories of groundwater protection areas in the
City to address abandoned drainage or domestic disposal wells which are
potentially harmful to underground sources of drinking water. The results of
the questionnaire can provide a great deal of information on the degree of risk
to the City's underground sources of drinking water. The EP A has provided
funding and training for volunteers to implement the UIC program at the local
level.
Environmental Protection Agencv (EPA): Environmental Education Grant
The EPA's Environmental Education Grant, enacted in 1991, is targeted at
cities or organizations in the amount of $25,000 or less. The Environmental
Education Grant is intended to fmance local education initiatives related to the
nature environment. Grants are awarded on a 50/50 cost share basis.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): Clean Lakes Grant
The Federal Clean Lakes Grant is the next step in lake restoration following
the State Clean Water Partnership Pro gram. The pro gram can include
significantly more funding than the state program and can be used for
development and implementation of lake restoration plans. Clean Lakes
funding is administered through the MPCA.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): Section 319 - Clear Water Act
Funding through EPA's Section 319 program supports state programs but is
potentially available for urban BMP and project implementation coordination.
The grants program includes a spring application period (May to lune) for the
state. The program is significant in that it can fund implementation (i.e.,
construction) rather than funding planning efforts or studies. Available funds
may involve either full or matching funds.
City of Arden Hiils. Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101,OO
Page 38
e
e
.
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,.
"
I
I
I
I
I
'I.
I
I
2,11,02
DN"R's Flood Hazard Mitigation Program
Up to 50 percent cost sharing is available through the bonding program, As
with PFA funds, this alternative best applies to a phased consuuction scenario,
since the state funding is on the biennium.
Metropolitan Council Water Ouality Initiative Grant
Annually, Metropolitan Council sponsors the Water Quality Initiative Grant
Program. Initially focused on improving the quality to the Minnesota River,
the program expanded in 1996 to consider larger, regional based applications.
The program includes both technical and educational grant categories. A
maximum of $100,000 is available, with up to three grant periods. A 25
percent match is required. Applications have been due in March.
Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund
The Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund is focused on projects that
demonstrate alternative forms of urban design and development that promotes
more efficient use of land and regional services. This funding source could be
geared towards water quality restoration and/or retrofitting treatment into a
redeveloping setting. An example is the Phalen Village in St. Paul, where the
Restoration of Ames Lake near a mostly vacant shopping center, was funded
in 1996,
RCWD Cost-Sharing for Municipal Retrofit Stormwater Ouality BMPs
The purpose of this program is to encourage municipalities to incorporate
water quality management practices in redevelopment, roadway, and storm
sewer improvement projects. The amount of the cost share by RCWD is 75%
of estimated project cost, or bid cost (whichever is lower), not to exceed
$50,000.
MPCA Low Interest Loans
Typically used for wastewater treatment and collection systems, MPCA's
State Revolving Loan Fund dollars can be used in watershed or non-point
source control. PFA administers the State Revolving Loan Program for
MPCA MPCA recently adopted rules to facilitate application of this program.
(Skwira, 1996). PFA typically waives the interest payment in the first two
years of the 20-year loan period and the interest rate.is generally below the
bonding rate. There is no dollar limit or competition for these funds.
MPCA Clean Water Partnership
MPCA receives federal matching funds for preserving and protecting lakes
and for enhancing their public use and enjoyment, under the Federal Clean
Lakes Program. The MPCA's Clean Water Partnership Program (CWP)
provides matching funds for lake improvement projects and non-point source
pollution abatement. The grant program is very competitive and the grant
administration can be time consuming and expensive.
City of Arden Hilis, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101,OO
Page 40
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
2.11.02
Miscellaneous Funding Sources
. DNR Outdoor Recreation Grant Program
. DNR Natural and Scenic Area Grant Program
. LCMR Legislative Commission Minnesota Resources
.
.
.
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Water Resource Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 41
I
'Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
"
I
I
I
I
I
I
.\t
I
I
2.11.02
Section 5 - Implementation
Introduction
The Implementation Section is intended to provide guidance in carrying out
the plan objectives. The implementation program summarizes the schedule for
and cost of recommended actions. Lastly, procedures for amending the plan
are discussed. Table 6 summarizes the implementation schedule for of the
Arden Hills Local Stormwater Management Plan.
Table 6
Arden Hills LSWMP Implementation Summary
<'l C'l '<t lI') ill r--- en m 0 ~
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
<'l <'l <'l <'l <'l <'l <'l <'l <'l <'l
Adopt Arden Hills LSWMP )(
Assessment of Problem Areas )( )(
Pond Design Standards and )( )( )( )( )( )( )( )( )( )(
Developer Guidelines
Administer Land Use Controls )( )( )( )( )( )( )( )( )( )(
Capital Improvements )( )( )( )( )( )( )( )( )( )(
Storm Water Utility or Other )( )( )( )( )( )( )( )( )( )(
Financing Methods
Information and Education )( )( )( )( )( )( )( )( )( )(
. Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act to be administered by RCWD.
. FEMA has reviewed the City of Arden Hills\tQ, determine flood prone
areas. ",
. RCWD's Board and the citizen Advisory Committe~'to take the lead in
information and education activities, along with the City. ,..."
Implementation Priorities
The implementation plan includes identification and prioritization of capital
improvements, administration, permitting, plan amendments, financing
alternatives, and monitoring programs. Public education and operation and
maintenance costs are considered separately under annual operating costs.
Prioritization of improvements is based on a review of all recommended
actions.
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 42
I
I
I
I
..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2.11.02
Planning-level estimates of capital expenditures has been made. Future
anticipated projects are also listed. The activities have been distributed
throughout a 10-year implementation plan extending though 2011.
The Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is summarized in Table 7.
Table 7
Capital Improvement Plan
Preliminary
Project Project Cost Date(s) of
Location Project Description Estimate Implementation Comments
Evaluation of Evaluation of existing water quality $60,000 2003-2004
City's Water treatment for all subwatersheds
Quality Treatment
Feasibility Study Preliminary engineering and design $38,000 1 Cost does not include
for Pond P-? surveying of ponds in
drainage system
Feasibility Study Preliminary engineering and design $14,000 1 Cost does not include
for Pond P-8 surveying of ponds in
drainage system
Feasibility Study Preliminary engineering and design $14,000 1 Cost does not include
for Pond P-10 surveying of ponds in
drainage system
Feasibility Study Preliminary engineering and design $14,000 , Cost does not include
for Pond P-" surveying of ponds in
drainage system
Feasibility Study Preliminary engineering and design $26,000 1 Cost does not include
for Pond P-'2 surveying of ponds in
drainage system'
Feasibility Study Preliminary engineering and design $28,000 2 Cost does not include
for Pond P-2 surveying ot ponds in
drainage system
Feasibility Study Preliminary engineering and design $38,000 2 Cost does not include
for Pond P-3 surveying of ponds in
drainage system
Feasibility Study Preliminary engineering and design $38,000 2 Cost does not include
for Pond P-4 surveying of ponds in
drainage system
Feasibiiity Study Preliminary engineering and design $26,000 3 Cost does not include
for Pond p-s surveying of ponds in
drainage system
Feasibility Study Preliminary engineering and design $19,000 3 Cost does not include
for Pond P-6 surveying of ponds in
drainage system
Feasibility Study Preliminary engineering and design $33,000 3 Cost does not include
for Pond P-9 surveying of ponds in
drainage system
Feasibility Study $288,000
Subtotai
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Water Resource Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 43
.
.
.
I
Ie
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
"
I
I
I
I
I
J
\t
I
I
2.11.02
Table 7 (Continued)
Project Project Description Preliminary Date(s) of Comments
Location Description Project Cost Implementation
Estimate
Pond P-7 Regional pond, includes $337,000 1
engineering and construction
costs
Pond P.8 Regionai pond, includes $146,890 1
engineering and construction
costs
Pond P-10 Regional pond, includes $146,890 1
engineering and construction
costs
Pond P-11 Regional pond, includes $149,620 1
engineering and construction
costs
Pond P-12 Regional pond, includes $239,370 1
engineering and construction
costs
Pond P-2 Regional pond, includes $260,470 2
engineering and construction
costs
Pond P-3 Regional pond, includes $337,000 2
engineering and construction
costs
Pond P.4 Regional pond, includes $337,000 2
engineering and construction
costs
Pond P-5 Regional pond, includes $239,370 3
engineering and construction
costs
Pond P-6 Regional pond, includes $190,420 3
engineering and construction
costs
Pond p-g Regional pond, includes $293,750 3
engineering and construction
costs
Regional Pond Construction Subtotal $2,6n,780
Total $3,020,780
The Plan anticipates some kind of stOfmwater activities at all locations. The Plan has identified stormwater
ponds for the purpose of developing cost estimates and budgeting purposes only. This should not be
interpreted as a commitment by the City to build a pond at all of these locations, especially where private
property is involved, or in the case of the pond shown at Valentine Park.
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 44
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2.11.02
The Implementation Plan is not a hard and fast commitment to complete each
and every activity in the time trame suggested. Rather, it is a suggested course
of action that will accomplish the major goal of this plan, to accommodate
growth and redevelopment in the community while protecting the
environment and water resources.
.
The Capital Improvement Plan was developed based on RCWD's Tier
classifications for the lakes in Arden Hills. The scheduling of these projects
should be coordinated with the City's Pavement Management Program
(PMP).
The fIrst item in the Capital Improvement Plan that should be completed is an
evaluation of the existing water quality treatment for each subwatershed to
determine which subwatersheds meet NURP standards. This can be used to
determine areas which do not have sufficient water quality treatment and can
be used as a tool to prioritize the other projects listed in the CIP.
The cost estimate for the construction of the proposed ponds does not include
land acquisition or easement acquisition. The cost also does not take into
account if a feasible study will be completed. The cost does include the larger
construction items such as excavation and restoration, and engineering and
administrative costs. The final project cost may change based on the
determination of scope of work. The Plan anticipates some kind of stormwater
activities at all locations. The Plan has identified stormwater ponds for the
purpose of developing cost estimates and budgeting purposes only. This
should not be interpreted as a commitment by the City to build a pond at all of
these locations, especially where private property is involved, or in the case of
the pond shown at Valentine Park.
.
Table 8 includes annual operating and maintenance costs, which are separate
from capital expenditures.
Table 8
A
c
nnual OperatinCl osts
Project Project Preliminary Date(s) of Comments
Location Description Project Cost Implementation
Estimate
Public Updating and managing web page, $10,000 Annual
Education and distribution of newsletter
Maintenance Annual maintenance of ponds and $40,000 Annual
of Ponds and ditches, including dredging when
Ditches necessarv
Street Sweeping the streets twice a year $30,000 Annual Assumes City labor and
Sweeping equipment, no contract
sweeDina.
The Implementation Plan should be reviewed on an annual basis. At that time,
each proposed improvement is to be reconsidered, City budgets adjusted, and
additional improvements added to the program.
.
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Water Resource Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 45
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
'.
~
I
2.11.02
CostiBenefit for Pollutant Removal
Storm water best management practices (BMPs) as described in the LSWMP
are the primary tool to improve the quality of urban streams and meet future
NPDES Phase II requirements. The BMPs include both structural and non-
structural alternatives. Resources and references on BMP's can be found in
Appendix M. The LSWMP suggests the construction of detention ponds as the
BMP for future urban storm water pollution control.
The term structural BMP refers to a physical facility designed and constructed
to remove pollutants from storm water runoff, potentially reduce downstream
erosion, provide flood control, and promote ground water recharge. Typical
structural BMPs include:
. Detention basins
. Retention basins
. Constructed wetlands
. Infiltration practices
. Filters
. Biofilters (swales and filter strips)
. Precast or cast-in-place treatment devices.
The typical capital costs for BMPs were evaluated based upon a recent U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency document entitled: Preliminary Data
Summary of Urban Storm Water Best Management Practices, (Office of
Water, Washington, D.C. August, 1999. EPA-821-R-99-012). Table 9 has
been adapted from the USEPA document (Table 6-1, page 6-3) to show
typical capital construction costs.
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 46
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2.11.02
Table 9
Capital and Maintenance Costs for BMP's
.
BMP Type Typical Cost' Notes Annual Maintenance Cost
($tcf) (% of Construction Cost)
Retention and 0.55-1.11 Cost range reflects economies of scale 30/0 - 6%
Detention Basins in designing this BMP. The lowest unit
cost represents approx. 150,000 CF of
storage, while the highest is approx.
15,000 CF.
Constructed 0.66 - 1.38 Little data available to assess cost. It is <1%
Wetland assumed they are approx. 25% more
expensive due to plant selection and
sediment forebay requirements lhan
detention basins.
infiltration Basin 1.44 Represents typical cost for a 0.25-acre 5%-10%
infiltration basin.
Sand Filter 3.32 - 6.65 Range in costs largely due to different 11%-13%
designs. Of the three most common,
perimeter sand filters are moderate cost
while surface and underground sand
filters are the most expensive.
Bioretention 5.87 Bioretention is relatively constant in cost 5%-7%
because it is usually designed as a
constant fraction of the total drainage
cost.
Grass Swale 0.55 Based on cost per square foot, 5%-7%
assuming 6 inches of storage in filter.
FiiterStrip 0-1.44 Based on cost per square foot, $320/acre (maintained)
assuming 6 inches of storage in the filter
strip. The lowest cost assumes that the
buffer uses existing vegetation, while
highest cosl assumes that sod was used
to establish the filter strip.
.
e
TypICal capItal cost on a volume basIS: August 2001
While detention ponds have an initial high cost for construction, their annual
operation and maintenance cost is among the lowest of alternatives. Table 10
illustrates the capital cost estimate for the proposed treatment ponds. Also
provided in the table is the unit cost per cubic foot of pond storage. The
USEP A cost is taken from the aforementioned document unit cost.
.
City ot Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Water Resource Management Plan
A-ARDEN010l.00
Page 47
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
lit
I
I
I
I
I
I
'-
I
I
2.11.02
Table 10
Cost Estimate Comparison for Proposed Treatment Ponds
Capital Cost' CosVc.f. o & M Cost2
POND SEH USEPA SEH USEPA
2 $260,468 $0.54 $251,503 $1,300 $2,490
3 $337,009 $0.53 $310,570 $1,685 $3,075
4 $337,009 $0.53 $310,570 $1,685 $3,075
5 $239,369 $0.54 $234,569 $1,197 $2,322
6 $190,416 $0.55 $192,642 $952 $1,907
7 $337,009 $0.53 $310,570 . $1,685 $3,075
8 $146,885 $0.56 $155,690 $743 $1,541
g $293,743 $0.53 $277,602 $1,469 $$2,748
10 $146,885 $0.56 $155,690 $734 $1,541
11 $149,619 $0.56 $158,160 $748 $1,566
12 $239,369 $0.54 $234,569 $1,197 $2,322
Totals: $2,667,780 $2,592,1353 $13,386 $21,373
1. Capital Cost includes engineering and construction expenses. Land cost not included.
2. Includes ,mnual inspection, weed control, etc. SEH estimate is based upon 0.5% of construction cost, while USEPA
estimate is based upon 0.99% of construction cost.
3. Capital Cost difference is $75,645 or 2.8%.
The importance of Table 10 relates to both the total capital cost comparison
and unit cost (per cubic foot of storage). The SEH estimate is very close to
the USEPA estimate (2.8%) for the same BMP. In addition, the unit cost is on
the low end of the reported literature.
The economic benefit cost is difficult to quantify from "balance sheet"
perspective for this BMP. The ideal approach would specify a chain of
events: pollutant loading reductions from construction of the ponds; the
physical-chemical properties of the receiving streams and consequent linkages
to biologic/ecological responses in the aquatic environment; and human
responses and values associated with these changes. The necessary data does
not exist to conduct such analysis. Instead, the benefits can be outlined in
terms of:
1. Effectiveness of reducing pollutant loads;
2. Direct water quality impacts; and
3. Economic benetits or costs.
The primary function of the proposed detention ponds is to reduce pollutants.
They are very effective at removing total suspended solids (often 90%+
efficiency), total phosphorus (up to 60% removal) and other associated
pollutants (heavy metals and hydrocarbons). Thus, their track record and
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 48
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'1
2.11.02
performance has been documented in various studies, but must be constructed
properly and maintained.
Water quality impact reduction was detailed in the Lake Josephine project
previously discussed in the Plan. Direct water quality improvement was
achieved through the use of an existing wetland/pond to treat the incoming
storm water.
The economic benefit or cost for the Lake Josephine project has not been
evaluated, although methods exist for such an analysis. A positive benefit has
been achieved versus a "no build" approach that could have been taken. Loss
of recreational usage (swimming, boating, and aesthetics) would likely have
continued to decrease in Lake Josephine in the absence of this project.
Amendment Procedures
The Arden Hills Local Stormwater Management Plan is intended to extend
through the year 2011. For the plan to remain dynamic, an avenue must be
available to implement new information, ideas, methods, standards and
management practices. Persons either residing or having business within the
City shall be able to request amendment proposals at any time.
Request for Amendments
Written requests for plan amendment are submitted to the City staff. The
request shall outline the need for the amendment as well as additional
materials that the City will need to consider before making its decision.
Staff Review
A decision is made to the validity of the request. Three options exist;
1. reject the amendment
2. accept the amendment as a minor issue, with minor issues collectively
added to the plan at a later date
3. accept the amendment as a major issue, with major issues requiring an
immediate amendment. In acting on an amendment request, staff shall
recommend to City council whether or not a public hearing is warranted.
Council Consideration
The amendment and the need for a public hearing shall be considered at a
regular or special Council meeting. Staff recommendations should also be
considered before decisions on appropriate action(s) are made.
Public Hearing, Council, and RCWD Approval
This step allows the public input based on the public sentiment. Council shall
determine when the public hearing should occur in the process. Based on the
public hearing, Council could approve the amendment, and, if necessary, refer
the amendments to the Watershed District Board for comment and approval.
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Locai Water Resource Management Plan
A-ARDEN010l.00
Page 49
e
.
.
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
"
I
I
I
I
I
I
\t
I
I
2.11.02
Council Adoption
Final action on an amendment following approval by the RCWD is Council
adoption. However, prior to the adoption, an additional public hearing could
be held to review the plan changes and to notify the appropriate stakeholders.
Annual Report to Council
A brief annual report should be made by City staff summarizing development
changes, capital improvements and other water management-related issues
that have occurred over the past year. The review should also include an
update on available funding sources for water resource issues. Grant programs
are especially important to review since they may change annually. These
changes do not necessarily require individual amendments. The reports can,
however, be considered when the plan is brought up to date. The report should
be completed by June 1st of each year to allow implementation items to be
considered in the normal budget process. Copies of the report should be filed
with the RCWD. The annual update can also serve as an important public
information tool. A summary could be published in the City's newsletter.
NPDES, Phase II
Currently, an NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System)
General Storm Water Permit for Construction Activity [#MNRllOOOO] is
required to be obtained by any person disturbing five or more acres of land
within the City of Arden Hills. This permit application is submitted to the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency in addition to a similar permit required
by Rice Creek Watershed District.
On December 8, 1999, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency issued fmal
Phase II storm water regulations that will apply to the City of Arden Hills.
The regulations require compliance with the following six minimum
measures:
1. Public Education and Outreach on Storm Water Impacts,
2. Public Involvement/Participation,
3. Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination,
4. Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control,
5. Post-Construction Storm Water Management in New Development and
Redevelopment, and
6. Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations.
The MPCA will issue two new NPDES general storm water permits to
implement this program with a permit application deadline of March 10, 2003.
The first general permit pertains to Minimum Measure #4 (see above) and will
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Stormwater Management Plan
A-ARDEN0101.00
Page 60
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
''''~
2.11.02
drop the minimum construction site threshold to one or more acres versus the
present five acres within #Ml'<"R110000.
.
The second general permit will apply to the remaining five minimum
measures. Both NPDES general storm water permits will go on public notice
by the MPCA for review and comment during mid-2002 with the intent to
have fmal permits by December, 2002.
GIS
The City does have GIS (Geographic Information System) data for the entire
City. It was supplied by the l-35W corridor coalition, which includes a
membership of seven cities. The GIS data includes information on roads,
parcels, existing and future land use, water and zoning.
However, the City does not have GIS data on any utilities: storm sewer,
sanitary sewer, or watermains. In the future it is recommended that the City
develop utility GIS information. Arden Hills could then use it to keep record
of their maintenance program and also use it for assessment. Developing this
data would be beneficial to the City.
.
.
City of Arden Hills, Minnesota
Local Water Resource Management Plan
A-ARDEN010l.00
Page 51
~
EN HILLS
.
MEMORANDUM
DATE: February l2, 2002
TO: Mayor and City Council
Joe Lynch, City Administrator
FROM: Aaron Parrish, City Planner fir
SUBJECT: Indykiewicz Reuse (Property Appraisal/Highest and Best Use)
Overview
.
In 1999, the Arden Hills Economic Development Authority (EDA) acquired the Indykiewicz
property to facilitate the relocation of West Round Lake Road at the intersection of Highway 96.
After West Round Lake Road was reconstructed and storm water ponding for future Highway 96
improvements created, a 3.3 acre remnant parcel remained for future development.
Subsequently, Chesapeake Companies has submitted a letter of interest for the property. In
response, the City Council has directed staff to obtain a quote to perform an appraisal.
After contacting a few appraisaj companies, Appraisal Concepts of Roseville provided staff with
the lowest quote to perform an appraisal of the property. They indicated the work could be
completed for approximately $1000. Staff has utilized them in the past and have been satisfied
with their performance. Staff would request Council authorization to proceed with the appraisal.
However, prior to proceeding with the appraisal, it is necessary for Council to articulate a range
of acceptable uses for the property. This will provide the basis for the valuation of the property.
Highest and Best Use of Property
Currently, the Gateway Business Zoning District allows the following principal uses:
. Business Services . Offices
. Clinics . Personal Services
. Clubs - Sports Fitness . Research
. Financial Institutions . Restaurants
. . Manufacturing Uses (Class I)
February ]2, 2002 Indykiewicz Reuse Memo
Page 2 of3
.
The Gateway Business Zoning District also allows multiple family residential, hotel/motel, and
multiple use operations as special uses within the District.
Chesapeake Companies Letter of Interest
In a letter dated January 16, 2002 addressed to the City Accountant, Chesapeake Companies
submitted a letter of interest to develop the remnant parcel. In doing so, they identified the
following uses:
. Business Service
. Clinic
. Day Care Facility
. Personal Service
. Restaurant - Sit-down
. Restaurant - Fast Food with drive-through
. Restaurant - Deli, coffee, bagel and take-
out food outlets, etc. . .
. Retail Sales and Service
. Service Station - Convenience store with
gas and car wash
. Studio
. Drive-in Business
. Drug Store with drive-through
. Dry Cleaning & Laundry Pick Up Station
. Financial Institution and Service
. Office
.
Staff Recommendation
With limited historical perspective regarding previous discussions regarding the use of this
property, staff would recommend the uses outlined below for the reuse of the remnant parcel:
. Business Service . Office
. Clinic . Personal Service
. Day Care Facility . Restaurant - Sit-down
Drug Store with drive-through . Restaurant - Deli, coffee, bagel and take-
. out food outlets, etc. . .
. Dry Cleaning . Retail Sales and Service
. Financial Institution and Service . Studio
The above recommendation leaves out three uses identified in the Chesapeake proposal including
a fast food restaurant; service station / convenience store with gas and car wash; and drive in
businesses. While the aforementioned three uses would be very easy to market and yield the
highest return on investment from the City's perspective, it is uncertain whether they represent
the highest and best use of the property. Any additional comment Council has with regard to this
issue would be greatly appreciated.
Finally, if Chesapeake is not amenable to a revision in uses, staff would seek authorization to a
begin marketing the property consistent with the acceptable uses identified by the Council and ...
information obtained from the appraisal. Please feel free to contact me if you should have any
questions.
e
.
e
February 12, 2002 Indykiewicz Reuse Memo
Page 3 of3
Requested Action
1. Articulate acceptable uses for property
2. Authorize staffto proceed with property appraisal
Attachment
1. January 16, 2002 Letter from Chesapeake Companies.
,
.
"
'~_I~r---' ;h)'(-''o:-
, : I :, ' I, " J': / I i I' I ) II I I II, " I
January 16, 2002
Mr. Terrance R. Post
City Accountant
City of Arden Hills
l245 West Highway 96
Arden Hills, MN 55112
Dear Terry:
.",
J!c.N 1 8 2002
("TV",'- " '" ,.
~, '\..'!""" /"~'.i~:':N HILLS
Pursuant to your request, we are submitting a letter of interest to develop the 3.714 acre parcel
located at the intersection of Highway 96 and Round Lake Road West.
We would be interested under the following terms:
I.
Exclusive development agreement with the City of Arden Hills for a period of eighteen
(18) months.
2.
Land Price:
3.
Access:
4.
Permitted Uses:
$566,307 ($3.50 psf@ 161,802 sf)
Right in right out access provided off Highway 96.
Business Service
Clinic - including, but not limited to, medical and dental
Day Care Facility
Drive-in Business
Drug Store with drive-through
Dry Cleaning & Laundry Pick up Station
Financial Institution & Service
Office
Personal Service
Restaurant - Sit-down
Restaurant - Fast food with drive-through
Restaurant - Deli, coffee, bagel and take-out food outlets, etc.
Retail Sales & Service
Service Station - Convenience store with gas and car wash
Studio
11100 WAYlATA BOULE\'....RD. SL'ITE 166. MINNETONK.A, MINNESOT.... 55305
TELEPHONE. (952) 847-2444. FAX (952) 595-8247
Mr. Terrance R. Post
January 16, 2002
Page Two
5.
Signage:
Pylon and monument signage.
We believe that our vested interest in Interstate Crossing will insure that this property is
developed with a quality use that is compatible with our mutual interests. No other developer
will have a greater sense of urgency or sensitivity to the quality of the development than
Chesapeake.
Please call me at 952-847-2446 if you have any questions.
Yours truly,
CHESAPEAKE COMPANIES NLP GROUP, LLC
6?z::: C? C:;ab~
Peter Carlson
President
PCC/amb
cc: Jon McClure
Diane Fredeen
.e
e.
--
.
e
.
URS
MEMORANDUM
Thresher Square
700 Third Street South
Minneapolis, MN 55415
Phone: (612) 370-0700
Fax: (612) 370-1378
To:
Joe Lynch
Copy: Nick Landwer.URS File: 37951-021-0101
From: Greg Brown, PE
Date: February 13, 2002
Subject: 2002 PMP Proposed Schedule/Process
As discussed at the January Work Session, the 2002 PMP scope will include the reconstruction
of Hunters Court and Waldon Place. The total estimated project cost is $195,000. The
following is the recommended schedule for the project.
Neighborhood Meeting
Accept Feasibility Report
Order Final Plans and Specifications
Public Hearing
(Possibly combined with Assessment Hearing)
Authorize Advertisement
Bid Opening
Bid Award
Begin Construction
Complete Construction
Assessment Hearing (if not done prior to start)
Week of March 4th, 2002
March 25, 2002
Apri129,2002
May 22, 2002
May 28, 2002
June 17,2002
August 30, 2002
September 30, 2002
Note - Since construction conditions and seed/sod conditions are generally acceptable into mid
October, the above schedule could slide up to six weeks and still be buildable during the 2002
season.
URS
MEMORANDUM
.
Thresher Square
700 Third Street South
Minneapolis, MN 55415
Phone: (612) 370-0700
Fax: (612) 370-1378
To:
Joe Lynch
Copy: Nick Landwer.URS File: 37951-021-0101
From: Greg Brown, PE
Date: February 13, 2002
Subject: 2003 PMP Proposed SchedulelProcess
Although tbe Council has not decided on the scope for the 2003 PMP project, in order to
achieve the neighborhood input desired by the Council I have outlined a milestone schedule for
activities associated with the 2003 PMP.
Discussion of Project Scope and Options
March 18,2002 Worksession
.
Neighborhood Meeting #1
May 20 - 31,2002
Draft Feasibility Report
June 1,2002 - July 29, 2002
Neighborhood Meeting #2 (present feasibility)
(possibly move to September)
August 1, 2002 - August15, 2002
Council Accept Feasiblity Report
Order Final Plans and Specifications
September 9,2002
Public Hearing
(Possibly combined with Assessment Hearing)
Authorize Advertisement
November 25, 2002
Bid Opening
January, 2002
Bid Award
February, 2002
Begin Construction
May,2002
Complete Construction
October, 2002
.
Assessment Hearing (if not done prior to start)
December, 2002