HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 06.gLakeville
December 19, 2014
Item No.
AVONLEA ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
JANUARY 5, 2015 CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Proposed Action
Staff recommends adoption of the following motion: Move to approve a resolution adopting
Response to Comments, Findings of Fact, and Record of Decision on the Avonlea
Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW).
Passage of this motion will result in the City notifying the State Environmental Quality Board
(EQB) and the review agencies that the City has approved the Avonlea EAW and has adopted
a negative declaration on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
Overview
Mattamy Homes is proposing to develop 832 single family homes and 249 multiple family
units on 469.6 acres of land located adjacent to Cedar Avenue (CSAH 23), south of 179'
Street. The proposed development requires the preparation of an EAW due to the number of
proposed residential dwellings. The City Council authorized distribution of the EAW at their
October 6, 2014 meeting and the public comment period ended on November 26, 2014.
Comments were received from eight agencies/persons and the comments were addressed in
the attached Response to Comments. The potential environmental effects associated with
the Avonlea development are not significant and can be addressed in the development plans
for the project.
Primary Issues to Consider
None
Supporting Information
• Resolution
• Findings of Fact
• Record of Decision
se to.Comments
Daryl Mirey, Plann(nb Director
Financial Impact: $ Budgeted: Y/N Source:
Related Documents (CIP, ERP, etc.): Avonlea EAW
Notes:
(Reserved for Dakota County Recording Information)
CITY OF LAKEVILLE
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ADOPTING RESPONSE TO COMMENTS, FINDINGS OF FACT, AND
RECORD OF DECISION ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
(EAW) FOR THE AVONLEA DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, Minnesota Rules Part 4410.1100 Subp. 6 requires that an EAW be
prepared for the proposed Avonlea residential development; and
WHEREAS, on September 19, 2014 an EAW was completed for the Avonlea
project, which is designed to include 832 single family lots and 249 multiple family units
on 469.6 acres in the City of Lakeville; and
WHEREAS, beginning on October 22, 2014 copies of the EAW were distributed
to all persons and agencies on the official Environmental Quality Board (EQB) mailing
list and other interested parties; and
WHEREAS, on October 17, 2014 a notice was published in the Lakeville
Messages section of the Sun This Week newspaper to announce the completion of the
EAW, its availability to interested parties, and the process for submitting comments on
the EAW; and
WHEREAS, on October 27, 2014 the EAW was publicly noticed in the EQB
Monitor, commencing the 30 day public comment period; and
WHEREAS, the 30 day comment period ended on November 26, 2014 and the
City of Lakeville accepted and responded to all substantive written comments received;
and
WHEREAS, none of the comments received recommended preparation of an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Avonlea Development.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Lakeville, Minnesota:
1. The EAW was prepared, published and distributed in compliance with the
procedures of the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act and Minnesota Rules,
Parts 4410.1000 to 4410.1700.
2. The EAW, combined with the supplemental information contained in the
Response to Comments, satisfactorily addressed all of the issues raised and
comments received for which existing information could have been
reasonably obtained, and further investigation is therefore not required.
3. Based on the criteria established in Minnesota Rules Part 4410.1700, the
project does not have the potential for significant environmental effects.
4. The Response to Comments, Findings of Fact, and Record of Decision are
hereby adopted.
5. The City of Lakeville makes a Negative Declaration on the need for an EIS.
6. The City Council hereby adopts a Negative Declaration.
DATED this 5t' day of January, 2015.
CITY OF LAKEVILLE
BY:
ATTEST:
Charlene Friedges, City Clerk
Matt Little, Mayor
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
(
CITY OF LAKEVILLE )
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. is a true and correct copy of
the resolution presented to and adopted by the City Council of the City of Lakeville at a
duly authorized meeting thereof held on the 5th day of January 2015, as shown by the
minutes of said meeting in my possession.
Charlene Friedges, City Clerk
(SEAL)
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. On October 27, 2014, the City of Lakeville published the EAW in the EQB Monitor.
2. The EAW is incorporated by reference in the Record of Decision.
3. As indicated in the EAW, the Avonlea project is proposed on approximately 469.6 acres of primarily
agricultural land in the northern portion of Lakeville. The project is proposing 832 single-family lots,
and 249 multi -family lots in Dakota County, City of Lakeville, Minnesota.
4. The City of Lakeville City Council authorized the EAW submittal to the Environmental Quality
Board (EQB) on October 6, 2014.
5. A press release announcing the availability of the EAW for public review and comment, including a
brief description of the project was published in the October 17, 2014 edition of the Lakeville
Messages newsletter.
6. The EAW was filed with the EQB and noticed of its availability for public review and comment was
published in the EQB monitor on October 27, 2014. A copy of the EAW was sent to all persons on
the EQB Distribution list and to persons who requested a copy. The EAW was also made available
on the City of Lakeville's website.
7. The 30 -day public review and comment period for the EAW began on October 27, 2014 and ended on
November 26, 2014.
8. During the 30 -day review and comment period the, City of Lakeville received 8 written comments on
the EAW. Comments were received from: Minnesota Department of Transportation, State Historic
Preservation Office, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Dakota County, U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Metropolitan Council, and Robert Erickson
(Lakeville Resident)
Proposed Project
The Avonlea project is proposed on approximately 469.6 acres of primarily agricultural land in the
northern portion of Lakeville. The project proposes 832 single-family lots, and 249 multi -family lots.
Approximately 171 acres of open space is also planned, which will include greenway corridors, parks,
trails, wetlands, and stormwater basins.
Minnesota Rules Part 4410.1000 Subp 2. Mandatory EAW Categories. An EAW shall be
prepared for any project that meets or exceeds the thresholds of any of the EAW categories listed in
part 4410.4300 or any of the EIS categories listed in part 4410.4400.
The proposed Avonlea project exceeds this mandatory EAW threshold.
Site Description and Existing Conditions
The existing site conditions include the following Cover -types on the Property: Estimated Before and
After Cover Types
Land Cover
Before (acres)
After (acres)
Wetland
20.6
20.1
Deep water/streams
0.03
0.03
Wooded/Forest
15.7
0.0'
Brush/Grassland
13.1
0.0'
Cropland
402.5
0.0
Lawn/landscaping
0.0
170.1
Impervious Surface
17.5
128.0
Stormwater Pond
0.2
0.02
Other: Regional Park
0.0
66.5
Other: Greenway
Corridors
0.0
17.5
Other Open Space
0.0
67.4
Totals
469.6
469.6
1 Some grassland and woodland area will be retained by the project within areas
ofgreenway corridors and areas represented as Other Open Space.
1 Post -construction stormwater ponding acreage is included in the category of
"Other Open Space".
3Public watercourse acreage is included under the wetland acreage.
Criteria for Determining Whether the Project has the Potential for Significant
Environmental Effects
Minnesota Rules 4410.1700 Subp. 1 states "An EIS shall be ordered for projects that have the potential
for significant environmental effects". In deciding whether a project has the potential for significant
environmental effects, Minnesota Rules 4410.1700 Subp. 7 indicates that the City of Lakeville must
consider the following factors:
Criteria A: The type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects;
Criteria B: The cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects;
Criteria C: The extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public
regulatory authority; and,
Criteria D: The extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a result of
other available environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project proposer, including
other EIS's.
A: Type, Extent, and Reversibility of Environmental Effects.
Findings
Item 6: Project Description
The Avonlea project is proposed on approximately 469.6 acres of primarily agricultural land in the
northern portion of Lakeville. The project proposes 832 single-family lots, and 249 multi -family lots.
Approximately 171 acres of open space is also planned, which will include greenway corridors, parks,
trails, wetlands, and stormwater basins. The project size triggered a mandatory EAW review under
EQB rules Part 4410.4300 Subp. I9.D., Residential Development.
2
Item 8: Permits and Approvals Required
As described in Table 8.1 of the EAW, the project will require some 28 permits and approvals prior to
construction, including a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, County right-of-way permits, and a
Sanitary Sewer Connection Permit. The project proposer will acquire all applicable permits prior to
project construction.
Item 9: Land Use
The project will require limited Comprehensive Plan amendments as part of the entitlement process to
address issues related to land use within Special Plan and Urban Reserve Areas. The project proposer
is committed to working closely with city staff to ensure that proposed uses within the Urban Reserve
Areas of the project are consistent with the city's future guidance for that area.
Item 11: Water Resources
Section 11.b.i. - Wastewater
The project is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan, and no immediate
sewer constraints were identified for the project. However, both the project proposer and city
recognize that the downstream trunk sewer is expected to have an eventual 1.835 CFS shortfall. The
City of Lakeville will continue to monitor the critical trunk sewer sections as recommended in the
Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan as well as compare the existing flow through the critical trunk
sewer sections to determine the amount of development that can occur before the critical sections
reach capacity. The city and project proposer are aware that Comprehensive Plan Amendments will
be necessary for sanitary sewer improvements that would occur prior to 2020 within portions of the
project area. The project proposer will pursue Comprehensive Plan Amendments that will re -guide
development staging described in the current Comprehensive Plan immediately following the
environmental review process.
Section 11.a.ii. — Groundwater
The project proposer has made note of parcels that have records of existing water wells. Any
unsealed wells will be properly sealed by a licensed well contractor prior to site construction in
accordance with State Rules.
Item 12: Contamination/Hazardous Materials/Wastes
The Phase H Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) work completed for the project area identifies
some limited contamination surrounding an existing farmstead. The project proposer will prepare a
Construction Contingency Plan prior to site construction to manage known impacted soils within the
Phase H investigation area.
Item 13: Fish, Wildlife, and Ecologically Sensitive Resources
The Minnesota DNR Natural Heritage Program conducted a database search of the Minnesota Natural
Heritage Information System (NNIS) to determine if there are listed plants and animals; native plant
communities; wildlife aggregations; geological features; or state rare features that are known to occur
within or near the project site. The database search did not identify rare features within the project
boundary. However, the DNR letter identified Blanding's turtle (Emydoidea blandingii), a state -
listed threatened species, as having been reported from the vicinity of the proposed project.
The project proposer will consider using wildlife -friendly erosion control products, and will refer to
the recommendations for avoiding and minimizing impacts to this species during construction.
The project proposer plans to install surmountable street curbs to reduce impacts on wildlife from
automobiles, and will consider the use of wildlife -friendly stormwater drains and oversized culverts to
facilitate wildlife passage beneath roadways. The project proposer will also consider introducing
educational materials along pathways and bike trails to facilitate public awareness and wildlife impact
avoidance.
To the degree possible, and as acceptable to the city, disturbed buffers and natural corridors will be
seeded to native seed mixes from locally attainable sources. Existing trees and vegetation will be
retained, where possible, and the planting of native tree and shrubs will be considered along stream
and greenway corridors.
Item 18: Transportation
The proposed two access points to Cedar Avenue are limited access intersections. Dakota County
will allow the limited access intersections, but not full access. The County has confirmed that the
intersection of Dodd & Cedar will be reconstructed as a limited access intersection, and the
intersection of 179th & Cedar will become a full movement access. The County has been in talks
with the City to create a north/south collector roadway through the Avonlea site. Hamburg Avenue is
well-positioned to become that collector. These improvements will provide safer alternatives for
development traffic other than a reliance on Cedar Avenue.
The Avonlea project can proceed with or without the extension of 185th or the reconstruction of
Dodd Boulevard intersection at Cedar. Avonlea traffic operational conclusions and recommendations
indicate that intersections function acceptably in either condition.
Overall Finding: No commenting agency found that the project would generate significant
environmental effects requiring the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
Therefore, the EAW, combined with the Response to Comments included above, is complete and
accurately assesses potential environmental impacts for the Avonlea project.
B: Cumulative Potential Effects of Related or Anticipated Future Projects.
Finding
The Avonlea project has been planned for full development. The project proposer owns no additional
land adjacent to the site. No future stages are planned or anticipated for this project.
C: Extent to Which the Environmental Effects are Subject to Mitigation.
Finding
Environmental effects on traffic and water quality are subject to additional approvals and/or mitigation
through requirements of local, state, and federal regulations, ordinances, management plans, and
permitting procedures. The following permits and approvals are required for the project addressed under
the EAW and these permitting and approval processes will provide additional opportunity to require
mitigation.
4
Permits and Approvals Required
Unit of Government
Type of Aeplication
Status
City of Lakeville
Concept Plan Approval
Completed
City of Lakeville
Comprehensive Plan
In process
Metropolitan Council
Amendment
City of Lakeville
PUD Rezoning Application
In process
City of Lakeville
Preliminary Plat Application
In process
City of Lakeville
Final Plat Approval
To be applied for
City of Lakeville
EAW Negative Declaration
In process
City of Lakeville
Grading Permit
To be applied for
City of Lakeville
Building Permit
To be applied for
City of Lakeville
Electrical Permit
To be applied for
City of Lakeville
Electrical Utility Affidavit
To be applied for
City of Lakeville
Plumbing Permit
To be applied for
City of Lakeville
Mechanical Permit
To be applied for
City of Lakeville
Wetland Delineation
Completed
Confirmation
City of Lakeville
Wetland Conservation Act
To be applied for
Permit
Dakota County
Right -of -Way Permit
To be applied for
Dakota County
Access Permit
To be applied for
Dakota County
Obstruction Permit
To be applied for (if needed)
Dakota County
Utility Permit
To be applied for (if needed)
Metropolitan Council
Sanitary Sewer Connection
To be applied for
Permit
Minnesota Department of
Well Sealing Permit
To be applied for
Health
Minnesota Department of
Water Main Extension
To be applied for
Health
Approval
Minnesota DNR Division of
Appropriation/Dewatering
To be applied for (if needed)
Waters
Permit
Minnesota DNR Division of
Public Waters Work Permit
To be applied for (if needed)
Waters
Minnesota DNR Division of
License to Cross Public
To be applied for (if needed)
Lands and Minerals
Waters
Minnesota Pollution Control
Sanitary Sewer Extension
To be applied for
Agency
Approval
Covered under general permit;
MN Pollution Control Agency
NPDES/SDS General Permit
submit NOI prior to
construction.
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Section 404 Clean Water Act
To be applied for
Permit
Vermillion River Watershed
Watershed Review
To be applied for
Note: The project proposer will apply for and receive applicable permits prior to project construction.
The potential environmental effects associated with this project are not significant and will be mitigated
in compliance with applicable rules, regulations, and permit requirements. City of Lakeville therefore
finds that the potential environmental effects of the project are "subject to mitigation by ongoing public
regulatory authority" (Minnesota Rules 4410.1700 Subp. 7.C.).
D: Extent to Which Environmental Effects Can be Anticipated and Controlled as a Result
of Other Available Environmental Studies Undertaken by Public Agencies or the Project
Proposer, Including Other Environmental Impact Statements.
The final factor the City must consider is the "extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated
and controlled as a result of other environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project
proposer, or of EIS's previously prepared on similar projects" (Minnesota Rules 4410.1700 Subp. 7 (D)).
The City's findings are set forth below.
The proposed project is reasonably similar to other residential development projects located in City of
Lakeville and in surrounding communities. Other projects of similar scope, accompanied by similar land
use, natural resources, surface water, traffic studies, and associated mitigation, have, in general,
successfully mitigated potential environmental impacts.
The EAW, in conjunction with this document, contains or references the known studies that provide
information or guidance regarding environmental effects that can be anticipated and controlled.
No EIS that addresses a similarly sized project is known to be available in the City of Lakeville or the
surrounding area.
In light of the results of environmental review and permitting processes for similar projects, City of
Lakeville finds that the environmental effects of the project can be adequately anticipated and controlled.
Based on the original EAW, comments received from agencies and individuals, the responses to
comments, and the criteria above, the City of Lakeville finds that the Avonlea project does not have the
potential for significant environmental effects and does not require the preparation of an EIS.
6
RECORD OF DECISION
Based on the EAW, the Response to Comments, and the Findings of Fact, the City of Lakeville as the
RGU for this environmental review, concludes the following:
The EAW was prepared, published, and distributed in compliance with Minnesota Statutes, Chapter
116D, to implement the environmental review procedures established by the Minnesota Environmental
Policy Act and Minnesota Rules Parts 4410.1000 to 4410.1700.
The EAW, combined with the supplemental information contained in the Response to Comments and
Findings of Fact, satisfactorily addressed and responded to all of the issues raised and comments received
for which existing information could have been reasonably obtained, and further investigation is therefore
not required.
Based on the criteria established in Minnesota Rules Part 4410.1700, the project does not have the
potential for significant environmental effects.
An EIS is not required for the Avonlea Residential Development project.
The City of Lakeville Council adopts a "Negative Declaration'
City of Lakeville
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS, FINDINGS OF FACT,
AND RECORD OF DECISION
FOR THE
Avonlea Residential Development
Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)
December 16, 2014
INTRODUCTION
The Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) was prepared, published, and distributed by the City
of Lakeville for the proposed Avonlea Residential Development (Avonlea) pursuant to Minnesota Rules,
Chapter 4410. The purpose of an EAW is to evaluate a proposed project's potential for significant
environmental effects. It is not to be used to justify a decision, nor do indications of adverse
environmental effects necessarily require that a project be disapproved. EAWs are used as guides in
issuing, amending, and denying permits and carrying out other responsibilities of governmental units to
avoid or minimize adverse environmental effects and to restore and enhance environmental quality
(Minnesota Rules 4410.0300, Subp. 3).
The completed EAW was distributed to the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) and persons and
agencies listed on the official EQB EAW Distribution List in accordance with Minnesota Rules
4410.1500. The notification was published in the EQB Monitor on October 27, 2014, initiating the 30 -
day comment period, and within the October 17, 2014 edition of the Lakeville Messages newsletter. The
30 -day comment period ended on November 26, 2014.
The EAW and comments have been reviewed in accordance with Minnesota Rules 4410.1700 to
determine if the project has potential for significant environmental effects. This document includes the
Response to Comments for all substantive comments received by the City of Lakeville, the Findings of
Fact supporting the decision, and the Record of Decision.
COMMENTS RECEIVED
Eight agencies and/or individuals submitted written comments on the EAW, and all of the comments were
dated or received prior to the comment period deadline. Copies of the comment letters are included in
Appendix A. The following table lists the comment letters received in chronological order.
Table 1.0. Comment Letten Reeeived
No.
Comment Letter Received From
Signatory
Abbreviation
Date
1
Minnesota Department of Transportation
Michael Corbett
MDOT
Oct. 23, 2014
2
State Historic Preservation Office
Sarah Beimers
SHPO
Nov. 4, 2014
3
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Brooke Haworth
MDNR
Nov. 21, 2014
4
Dakota County
Steven Mielke
DCTY
Nov. 21, 2014
5
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Ryan Malterud
ACOE
Nov. 24, 2014
6
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
Karen Kromar
MPCA
Nov. 25, 2014
7
Metropolitan Council
LisaBeth Bara'as
METC
Nov. 25, 2014
8
Robert Erickson, Lakeville Resident
Robert Erickson
RE
Nov. 25, 2014
2
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
Minnesota Rules 4410.1600 states that the comments shall address the accuracy and completeness of the
material contained in the EAW, potential impacts that may warrant further investigation before the project
is commenced, and the need for an EIS on the proposed project. Comments that do not address these
areas have been noted for the record, but are not necessarily addressed in the response. As part of the
process in determining whether an EIS is needed, the City of Lakeville must respond to all substantive
comments received during the 30 -day comment period (Minnesota Rules 4410.1700, Subp. 4 and 5).
This document responds to comments on an item -by -item basis. Comments are organized by EAW Item
number. Agencies who commented are listed by abbreviation in random order at the start of each topic
and item. It should be noted that none of the commenting agencies requested that an EIS be ordered for
the project, but rather requested some data clarifications.
ITEM -BY -ITEM RESPONSES
Item 7. Cover Types
Agencies/Individuals Commenting: METC
Response
Thank you for your comments regarding the use of "Regional Park" in the EAW for the 66.5 -acre park on
the southern portion of the site. Going forward, all references to the park will be amended to
"Community Playfield."
Item 8. Permits and Approvals Required
Agencies/Individuals Commenting: MDNR
Response
Thank you for your comments regarding potential need for additional environmental review should the
project alter more than 500 feet of public waterway. The project proposer will work with the City of
Lakeville, as the RGU, for a determination if more than 500 linear feet of disturbance is planned. It
should be noted that portions of watercourse channels on the project site were previously straightened
from historic, natural alignments.
Item 9. Land Use
Agencies/Individuals Commenting: MPCA, METC, RE
Response
Thank you for your comments regarding the need for Comprehensive Plan Amendments. As part of the
entitlement process, the project proposer has anticipated the need for amendments to the city's
Comprehensive Plan, and will work closely with city staff to ensure that proposed uses within the project
that are within the Urban Reserve Area, which are subject to review by the Planning Commission and
approval of the City Council, are consistent with the city's future goals and land use guidance for that
area.
Thank you for your comments regarding demolition of the existing farmstead structures. Prior to
demolition, the project proposer will have the buildings inspected for hazardous materials such as
asbestos and lead- based paint. Should hazardous materials be identified within the structures, the project
proposer will provide notification to the MPCA prior to performing demolition work as described.
Item 11. Water Resources
Agencies/Individuals Commenting: DCTY, ACOE, MPCA, METC, RE
Response
Section ll.b.i. - Wastewater
Thank you for your comments regarding projected wastewater flows from the project, downstream
capacity, and layout of the wastewater collection system. The proposed wastewater system layout is
provided in Appendix B. While not included in the EAW document, the project proposer performed a
Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis as the basis for the information provided in the EAW
document. That document is attached as Appendix C.
The City's 2008 Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan utilizes the City's 2030 Comprehensive Land Use
plan to estimate the anticipated flow rates from areas that are not yet developed. The Land Use Plan
indicates that the EAW project area will be a combination of low/medium density residential, medium
density residential, medium/high density residential and high density residential. Based on these land
uses, the estimated peak flow rate added to the critical trunk sewer section as planned for in the City's
Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan is 0.377 million gallons per day (MGD) or 0.58 CFS.
The Avonlea project is proposed to have less density than what is guided by the 2030 Comprehensive
Land Use Plan. The project will consist of low density residential, medium density residential and high
density residential land uses. However, it is proposed that the entire site drain to the North Creek trunk
sanitary sewer, including the southern portion currently designated as part of the Farmington Outlet
District. Applying the estimated sanitary sewer flow as defined in the Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer
Plan to each land use results in an estimated peak flow of 0.240 MGD or 0.37 CFS from the Avonlea
project. These amounts are well below those contemplated by the City's Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer
Plan for the project area.
While the project is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan, and no immediate
sewer constraints were identified for this particular project, both the project proposer and City recognize
that the downstream trunk sewer is expected to have an eventual 1.835 CFS shortfall. The City of
Lakeville will continue to monitor the critical trunk sewer sections as recommended in the
Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan as well as compare the existing flow through the critical trunk sewer
sections to determine the amount of development that can occur before the critical sections reach
capacity. This is an ongoing review process that will depend largely upon the pace of development and
market demand for additional housing and commercial resources in the area.
The City and project proposer are aware that Comprehensive Plan Amendments will be necessary for
sanitary sewer improvements that would occur prior to 2020 within portions of the project area. The
project proposer will pursue Comprehensive Plan Amendments that will re -guide the current development
staging described in the 2008 Lakeville Comprehensive Land Use Plan immediately following the
Environmental Review Process in conjunction with the preliminary plat application.
4
Section ll.b.ii. - Stormwater
Thank you for your comments regarding MPCA National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System/State
Disposal System (NPDES/SDS) Construction Stormwater Permit requirements. The project proposer is
committed to implementing Best Management Practices (BMPs) during construction, will adhere to
current requirements related to soil erosion and stabilization, and will review fish spawning dates for any
pertinent restrictions. The project proposer will submit updated stormwater and erosion control
information with the Preliminary Plat Submittal, and will have a reviewed and approved Stormwater
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) in place prior to construction.
Section ll.b.iv. —Surface Waters
Thank you for your comments regarding Department of the Army (DA) permitting. Once preliminary
grading plans are available for the project, the project proposer will review those plans for potential
impacts to wetlands and navigable waters of the United States (WOUS). If discharges of dredged or fill
material in a WOUS is anticipated, the project proposer will seek a permit from the St. Paul District of the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Section ll.a.ii. — Groundwater
Thank you for your comments regarding private water wells as identified in the Dakota County well
database. The project proposer has made note of the three parcels that have well records. Any unsealed
wells will be properly sealed by a licensed well contractor prior to site construction in accordance with
State Rules. Unsealed wells will not be buried or constructed over without first being properly sealed and
abandoned.
Item 12. Contamination/Hazardous Materials/Wastes
Agencies/Individuals Commenting: MPCA
Response
Thank you for your comments regarding the Phase I and Phase H Environmental Site Assessment (ESA)
work completed for the project area. Because of the size of these documents, the information was
summarized for the EAW. The documents have now been provided in full for clarification purposes
regarding the work performed at the site (Appendix D Phase I; Appendix E Phase II), and known
conditions. As mentioned in the EAW, the project proposer will prepare a Construction Contingency
Plan prior to site construction to manage known impacted soils within the Phase II investigation area.
Item 13. Fish, Wildlife, Plant Communities, and Sensitive Ecological Resources
Agencies/Individuals Commenting: MDNR, METC
Response
Thank you for your comments regarding wildlife protection. The project proposer appreciates the
Minnesota DNR's concerns regarding potential wildlife impacts in the project area, both during and after
construction.
While there were no threatened, endangered, or special concern species records for the project site, the
project proposer is aware that Blanding's Turtles have been reported in the project vicinity that could
potentially be harmed by erosion control materials containing mesh. The project proposer will consider
using wildlife -friendly erosion control products, and will refer to the recommendations for avoiding and
minimizing impacts to this species during construction.
The project proposer plans to install surmountable street curbs to reduce impacts on wildlife from
automobiles, and will consider the use of wildlife -friendly stormwater drains and oversized culverts to
facilitate wildlife passage beneath roadways. The project proposer will also consider introducing
educational materials along trails to facilitate public awareness and wildlife impact avoidance.
To the degree possible, and as acceptable to the city, disturbed buffers and natural corridors will be
seeded to native seed mixes from locally attainable sources. Existing trees and vegetation will be
retained, where possible, and the planting of native tree and shrubs will be considered along stream and
greenway corridors.
Item 18. Transportation
Agencies/Individuals Commenting: DCTY, RE
Response
Thank you for the comments regarding the two access points proposed to Cedar Avenue being limited
access intersections. We understand that Dakota County will allow the limited access intersections, but
not full access. We are aware that Dakota County has confirmed that the intersection of Dodd Boulevard
and Cedar Avenue will be reconstructed as a limited access intersection, and the intersection of 179th
Street and Cedar Avenue will become a full movement access. Regarding the recommendation to restri�e
185"' Street (CSAR 60) to accommodate dual left turns, Dakota County states that the extension of 185
Street (CSAR 60) will likely occur before 2025. This is duly noted. At the time this recommendation
was made, there were no plans in the CIP to extend 185"' Street (CSAH 60) to the east; therefore the
recommendation was made so as to improve traffic flow at the intersection. The County says they have
been in talks with the City to create a north/south collector roadway through the Avonlea project.
Hamburg Avenue is well-positioned to become that collector. It is duly noted that pedestrian access will
be provided to the planned RED Line Bus Rapid Transit facility.
Thank you for your comment regarding the programming of 185"' Street extension. Regarding the
question "Is the proposed subdivision premature?" the response is "no". As mentioned above, when this
recommendation was made, there were no plans in the CIP to extend 185"' Street (CSAR 60) to the east;
therefore the recommendation was made so as to improve traffic flow at the intersection. The proposed
development and staging of construction for 185"' Street will be such to provide adequate capacity for the
streets serving the project, as well as provide for right-of-way and proportional funding for the completion
of 185"' Street to serve not only Avonlea but surrounding land uses as anticipated by the Comprehensive
Plan and Dakota County and Lakeville CIPs. Further, both agencies are in the planning stages to improve
other roadways in the area (such as 179"' between Cedar and Dodd through the Boatman property) that
will provide safer alternatives for development traffic other than a reliance on Cedar Avenue.
Item 19. Cumulative Potential Effects
Agencies/Individuals Commenting: METC
Response
Thank you for your comment regarding higher density residential uses along corridors, Thrive 2040, and
the draft Transportation Policy Plan which is scheduled for adoption in January 2015. This is duly noted.