The URL can be used to link to this page

CAS-05_AUAR COMMENTS BY OTHERSDEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Ecological and Water Resource 1200 Warner Road St. Paul, MN 55106 April 17, 2017 Transmitted Electronically Kate Aanenson Community Development Director 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: Chanhassen AUAR 2016 Update Dear Kate Aanenson, The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has reviewed the Chanhassen 2005 Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) 2016 Update. We offer the following comments. As noted in the section guidelines on page 22, prior consultation with the DNR Natural Heritage program for information about reports of rare plant and animal species in the vicinity is required for an AUAR. NHIS Reviews are valid for one year and are project and location specific. The results for one project will not necessarily be the same for another project, even if they are in the same general area. Therefore, using a Review for another project (page 23 notes an Environmental Impact Statement for the TH 212/312 expansion project contains additional information) may not be appropriate. In addition, the records presented in the 2017 AUAR are from communications that occurred in 2005. New records are added to the Natural Heritage Database on a daily basis and referring to data that was obtained in 2005 without prior consultation is not recommended. We strongly recommend that all projects be reviewed by the Minnesota Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program prior to submitting an AUAR for public review. That said, an approximate one -mile radius of the project area was reviewed by DNR. Based on this review, there are no new known occurrences of rare features within the project area. There is an occurrence of a Minnesota Biological Site of High Biodiversity located just southwest of the project area that should be identified; this area is also designated as a Central Region Regionally Significant Ecological Area. These, and other natural resource GIS layers can downloaded from the Minnesota Geospatial Commons website at https://gisdata.mn.gov/group/51522a54-9af5-4fO6-blad- 7 3cd b814cf65?organ ization=us-m n-state-dn r. As noted in the EAW Guidance Form, the AUAR should discuss whether the planned projects may potentially affect rare features. While there were no known occurrences identified within the project area itself, several were noted to have been identified within 1-2 miles that could potentially be indirectly affected as a result of project activities. The AUAR should include a discussion on how features identified may be impacted by the project. Thank you for the consideration of our comments. Sincerely, /s/ Rebecca Horton Region Environmental Assessment Ecologist Minnesota Department of Natural Resources • Ecological and Water Resources 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106 ST PAUL Robert Street North MN 550 Saint Paul, MN 55101-1805 neopost°' FIRST-CLASS MAIL Saint 18APR '17 METROPOLITAN PH 1 L �$000,46- C o u N C I L ' ZIP 55101 ID41M122516251643 Ms. Kate Aanenson Community Development Director RECEIVED 7700 Market Boulevard APR 2 2017 Chanhassen, MN 55317 CITY OF CHANHASSEN SS31 7—d363oo I r IIIII h IItIIIP I ti dlldttllthdllllPPul4tihlllu 0 4 a ` r�. r April 17, 2017 Ms. Kate Aanenson Community Development Director 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 RE: Chanhassen Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) Metropolitan Council Review File No. 19028-2 Metropolitan Council District No. 4 Dear Ms. Aanenson: Metropolitan Council staff completed its review of the Chanhassen Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) to determine its accuracy and completeness in addressing regional concerns. This is an update to the MUSA AUAR adopted in 2003.The project area covers approximately 600 acres with the City that is generally bound by Lyman Boulevard on the north, Audubon Road on the west, Pioneer Trail on the south and Powers Boulevard on the east. Since the original AUAR, a significant amount of development has occurred but there are vacant parcels, most notably a 118 acre area designated as either office or regional commercial in the City's 2030 Comprehensive Plan. A Concept PUD for this area called Avienda is the impetus for the AUAR Update. The proposal includes approximately 118 acres of regional commercial, office, and medium/high density residential development. Staff concludes that the AUAR is complete and accurate with respect to regional concerns and does not raise major issues of consistency with Council policies. However, staff offers the following comments for your consideration: Transportation Analysis Zone (TAZ) Forecasts (Todd Graham, 651-602-1322) When the City chooses to proceed with a scenario, the City will need to reflect the chosen scenario in its 2040 comprehensive plan update. A draft set of TAZ forecasts for 2040 has been prepared by the Council and is available for local governments to review. Most of the Avienda site is located in TAZ #387. The office development on the east side of Hwy 212 is a small piece of TAZ #386. TAZ #387 is currently expected to gain +466 households during 2014-40. AUAR Scenario B fits approximately with this forecast. If Scenario A is pursued, 602 housing units would be added in TAZ #387. Council staff recommend adjusting the TAZs forecast when the City chooses a scenario. Balancing adjustments can be made to TAZs elsewhere in Chanhassen. The City can update the TAZs table at the time of its plan update. METROPOLITAN C 0 U N C I L The Council will not take formal action on the AUAR. If you have any questions or need further information, please contact Angela R. Torres, Principal Reviewer, at 651-602-1566. Local Planning Assistance CC: Steve O'Brien, MHFA Tod Sherman, Development Reviews Coordinator, MnDOT - Metro Division Deb Barber, Metropolitan Council District No. 4 Angela R. Torres, Sector Representative/ Principal Reviewer Raya Esmaeili, Reviews Coordinator N:ICom LL-vILPAICommunitieslChanhassenILetterslCMnha en 19028-1AUAR-OK with CommentsAm Minnesota Department of Transportation Metropolitan District Waters Edge OFI 1500 West County Road B-2 Roseville, MN 55113-3174 IS APIR 2017 PM -IP'SAi�if� 02 1 Y1 00 0001402535 APR 18 2017 RECEIVED APR 2 0 2017 CIIY OF CHA14HASSEN CI�t�ae� M/,j 5s3 r� 5531734147 drv^ilil 111ilrllr111111i,r11Jill 1111,111, r111.1.1111'1 1DEPARTMENT OF 14TRANSPORTATION April 17, 2017 Kate Aanenson City of Chanhassen PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 SUBJECT: Chanhassen 2016 AUAR MnDOT Review # AUAR17-002 Metropolitan District Waters Edge Building 1500 County Road B2 West Roseville, MN 55113 NW Quad US 212 and Powers Road (CR17), South of Lyman Blvd (CR18) Chanhassen, Carver County Dear Ms. Aanenson: Thank you for the opportunity to review the 2016 Chanhassen AUAR. Please note that MnDOT's review of this AUAR does not constitute approval of a regional traffic analysis and is not a specific approval for access or new roadway improvements. As plans are refined, we would like the opportunity to meet with our partners and to review the updated information. MnDOT's staff has reviewed the document and has the following comments: Design Continue to work with MNDOT on any of the proposed state highway changes suggested in this report. Any changes to the TH 212 interchange will require a Level 1 Layout review and approval. Diane Langenbach, MnDOT Area Engineer, can help guide you the process. For questions regarding these comments, contact Nancy Jacobson (nancy.l.jacobson@state.mn.us or 651-234-7647) in MnDOT's Metro Design Section. Review Submittal Options: MnDOT's goal is to complete the review of plans within 30 days. Submittals sent in electronically can usually be turned around faster. There are four submittal options. Please submit either: 1. One (1) electronic pdf version of the plans. MnDOT can accept the plans via a -mail at metrodevreviews.dot@state.mn.us provided that each separate a -mail is under 20 megabytes. 2. Three (3) sets of full size plans. Although submitting seven sets of full size plans will expedite the review process. Plans can be sent to: MnDOT — Metro District Planning Section Development Reviews Coordinator 1500 West County Road B-2 Roseville, MN 55113 An equal opportunity employer MnDOT Metropolitan District, Waters Edge Building, 1500 County Road B2 West, Roseville, MN 55113 3. One (1) compact disc. 4. Plans can also be submitted to MnDOT's External FTP Site. Please send files to: ftp://fty2.dot.state.mn.us/pub/incomingJMetroWatersEdee/Planning Internet Explorer doesn't work using ftp so please use an FTP Client or your Windows Explorer (My Computer). Also, please send a note to metrodevreviews.dotj&state.mn.us indicating that the plans have been submitted on the FTP site. If you have any questions concerning this review, please contact me at (651) 234-7784. Sincerely, 1119* Karen Scheffmg Principal Planner CC: Nancy Jacobson, Design Hailu Shekur, Water Resources Merlin Kent, Traffic Clare Lackey, Traffic Engineering Doug Nelson, Right -of -Way Buck Craig, Permits Diane Langenbach, Area Engineer Natalie Ries, Noise Bruce Wetherbee Russell Owen, Metropolitan Council MnDOT Metropolitan District, Waters Edge Building, 1500 County Road B2 West, Roseville, MN 55113 April 17, 2017 Ms. Kate Aanenson Community Development Director 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 RE: Chanhassen Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) Metropolitan Council Review File No. 19028-2 Metropolitan Council District No. 4 Dear Ms. Aanenson: Metropolitan Council staff completed its review of the Chanhassen Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) to determine its accuracy and completeness in addressing regional concerns. This is an update to the MUSA AUAR adopted in 2003.The project area covers approximately 600 acres with the City that is generally bound by Lyman Boulevard on the north, Audubon Road on the west, Pioneer Trail on the south and Powers Boulevard on the east. Since the original AUAR, a significant amount of development has occurred but there are vacant parcels, most notably a It 8 acre area designated as either office or regional commercial in the City's 2030 Comprehensive Plan. A Concept PUD for this area called Avienda is the impetus for the AUAR Update. The proposal includes approximately 118 acres of regional commercial, office, and medium/high density residential development. Staff concludes that the AUAR is complete and accurate with respect to regional concerns and does not raise major issues of consistency with Council policies. However, staff offers the following comments for your consideration: Transportation Analysis Zane (TAZ) Forecasts (Todd Graham, 651-602-1322) When the City chooses to proceed with a scenario, the City will need to reflect the chosen scenario in its 2040 comprehensive plan update. A draft set of TAZ forecasts for 2040 has been prepared by the Council and is available for local governments to review. Most of the Avienda site is located in TAZ #387. The office development on the east side of Hwy 212 is a small piece of TAZ 4386. TAZ #387 is currently expected to gain +466 households during 2014-40. AUAR Scenario B fits approximately with this forecast. If Scenario A is pursued, 602 housing units would be added in TAZ #387. Council staff recommend adjusting the TAZs forecast when the City chooses a scenario. Balancing adjustments can be made to TAZs elsewhere in Chanhassen. The City can update the TAZs table at the time of its plan update. METROPOLITAN C 0 U N C I L The Council will not take formal action on the AUAR. If you have any questions or need further information, please contact Angela R. Torres, Principal Reviewer, at 651-602-1566. ince Lis eth Barajas Manager Local Planning Assistance CC: Steve O'Brien, MHFA Tod Sherman, Development Reviews Coordinator, MnDOT - Metro Division Deb Barber, Metropolitan Council District No. 4 Angela R. Torres, Sector Representative/ Principal Reviewer Raya Esmaeili, Reviews Coordinator N:ICo DevILPAICmnmunilieslChanha nV.ctmrslChanhamen 19028-2AUAR- OKWIh Comments.do CITY OF C HANHASSE N Chanhassen is a Community for Life - ProvidingforTodayand PlanningforTomorrow y 1"a Ob MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Kate Aanensoni Date: March 7, 2017 U7 Subj: Avienda Public Meeting BACKGROUND As part of the update to the Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR), an open house was held on February 28, 2017. Attached is the material that was presented at this open house as well as attendance rosters and a summary of the public comments. While it is not required, the staff is holding this public meeting in order to gather input. Staff will review, via PowerPoint, information that summarizes the update to that AUAR. The draft of the AUAR will be available at the Planning Commission Meeting. ANALYSIS AFJ After the presentation b staff, it is recommended that the P y chair open the meeting to public i comment. Comments received will be forwarded to the City Council as a part of their review on Marc , 2 addition, the AUAR will be published by the Environmental Quality Board, a owing for additional comment period by any impacted jurisdiction. (This would include, to school districts, watershed districts, MnDOT, Army Corp of Engineers, DNR, etc.) A minimum y comment period is required. By mid -April, the comment period will close. "Ittaff will be responding to all comments submitted and will be making a formal recommendation on the miti Lion strategies to the City Council for their formal action tentatively sched for ay8;2 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends to open meeting to public comment, close hearing, and forward public comment to the City Council. PH 952.227.1100 • www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us • FX 952.227.1110 7700 MARKET BOULEVARD • PO BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN • MINNESOTA 55317 Planning Commission AUAR — Avienda March 7, 2017 Page 2 of 2 ATTACHMENTS 1. PowerPoint and Summary of AUAR 2. Open House Attendance Roster 3. Summary of Comments Received at February 28, 2017 Open House G:TLAN\20I6 Planning Cases\2016-25 Avienda - Chan Retail Site\AUAR\Planning Commission Memo Chanhassen 2005 Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) Update March 2017 Agenda • Review the purpose of an AUAR • Discuss 2005 AUAR background and history • Review existing site conditions • Present and review alternative development scenarios • Review potential impacts and mitigation strategies: — Traffic/Transportation systems — Infrastructure Systems (potable water, sanitary sewer) — Storm water and drainage systems — Environmental/Natural Resources • Review next steps and project schedule Alternative Urban Areawide Review What is an AUAR? PROJECT LOCATION An Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) analyzes �� •---•• the potential environmental effects or impacts resulting from anticipated future development. The AUAR does not focus on a particular project but on a number of projects or developments f expected to occur in an area over an expected period of time. The land use plan identified in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan will be ----I used as the basis for evaluating impacts. The AUAR will also seek to identify methods of mitigating the impacts of the proposed I development. The AUAR process will follow Minnesota State Rules, including the opportunity for the public and other governmental j agencies to review and comment on the draft document. The AUAR will examine the potential impacts on areas such as: » Natural resources » Historic resources » Park, recreation areas or trails » Traffic » Water, sewer and stormwater infrastructure M.I.1• Purpose of AUAR • Authorized by laws as a an alternative form of environmental review (alternative to an EAW and EIS) to analyze environmental impacts of certain development. • Part of the entitlement process when development triggers the warrants for an environmental review. • The AUAR does not approve a specific project for development. Rather it defines an order of magnitude and mitigation steps. fy'lS�•Y�1.w.elw�.�a.Y1M. _____.__ �rwknaaa— ® bw�w1Y _ rr M r B ACRES TOTAL 624 ACRES Agriculture Use (row crop or pasture) 442 Acres Agriculture, Residential 174 Acres Residential Estate OTHER AREA CALCULATIONS 9 Acres T.H.212 Right -Of -Way (approximate area) 125 Acres Wetlands (Chanhassen Wetland Inventory-45.2 acres and Bernardi Property delineated --- 8.8 acres) 54 Acres RoodwaysrFloodplain 78 Acres Steep Slopes(Chanahassen inventory of 18%or greater 19 Acres Bluff Cmk Overlay Primary District 200 Acres ©Key Takeaways a Proposed primarily residential and office uses a School for Chaska School District sited for NW quandrant 2005 AUAR Medium Density Residential/Low Density Residential 120 8 dulacre 954 units Medium Density Residential 66 8 dulacre 680 units MAL ROUSING tMnS 1,634 Office 17 0.35FAR 270,000square feet ' OfflceAndusthal 34 0.30FAR 450,000 square feet* TOTAL NON-RESWENTIAL SQUARE FEET 720,000 square Het Pa6lOpen Space 45 Passive Park Park 35 Athletic Fields Institutional 36 Middla/High 1,700 Students _ .rounded to nearest 5,000 square feet 1XIIENIVA J I IJ ■ l j;A -� W4. r o �A7 Pa`% 1 7v ■ ■. er';^4 r bri• .= w�It :. 1 1, �� /'..'7�{ filar �II ICI ..% . .r._ _ 'fyJIC11lr 1 !1�,. a _. EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS Wetlands `A 4k, -1.4 :. dj , IMP Floodway Bluff Creek Overlay Development Constraints G m 'AnnpM P.nm'rn Mamf Lnl NYlrre Development Constraints Land Use Concepts • Two Development Concepts Evaluated • Differences due to alternative concepts for Avienda site and alternative concept for remnant right-of-way at Pioneer Trail and 212. • Overall magnitude difference from 2005 AUAR — 250 to 400 fewer housing units — 500,000 to 600,000 more square feet of non- residential development — No High School within the project area.�;� �E� go/Zo x Ih 70 Key Takeaways ry 7j *4!;�p�bjee'y . Over 600 medium and high density residential units between NE and SW quadrants Around 1.3 million total square feet of commercial and office development "r+ ' • Over 830,000 square feet of business development A„•,w„ �,�,,� ,�„�,,,, • 460,500 square feet of M. retail development Mitigation of existing wetlands in NE quadrant ®®®® to allow for Increased development potential ept A PAOQ-..�� -Y AMYAAMI .AAAAAAAtl� r.A.Ara a�AA�........ e 0 Key Takeaways Almost 400 new medium and high denisty residential units primarily in the NE quadrant . Around 1.3 million total square feet of commercial and �%� 2 office development • Over i million square feet of business development • 250.000 square feet of retail development Maintenance of existing wetlands In NE quadrant resulting in more passive open space yl r 1 � re SIR t1 ��n to i sir 1-7 LIWA bIULEVAHO 0 14 s Concept B Avienda 0 Wetlands Surface Water Management • Maintain drainage patterns • Abstract first 1.1-inch of runoff from new impervious • Maintain discharge rates at or below current levels • Remove 60% phosphorous and 90% TSS • Pre -treat runoff prior to infiltration/filtration • Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) . IOV,m� CHAMASSEN zoos MM UMAX IGmleyoHom slWNZ WAM wwAGOMNT PLM Sanitary Sewer and Water Service P � �fY1rMY Z\V1 KimleyoHorn OmyO i I.w.Y aw � ria Ylw Y �p1I11 YMI Mld YMI NA1[R YVN �t YIr RR Y/JH �_ �� P1oR[a nay RRypRM !/.MIMY YYFR .C. rur IIwP CHANHASSEN 2005 AUAR UPDATE KimleyoHorn A,,, PROPOSED SANITARY UTgJTIES — WfpM[D rnENuuY CHANHASSEN 2005 AUAR UPDATE PROPOSED wATMAIN UTIUTIES Traffic Kimleu)» Horn 1 1 1 1 1 L Y / r — — V / I Pioneer Trail • FAS"lltflfI ^, 0 sde to511en IAIOmbpdNeA I ® MDTVd"s EXISTING CONDITIONS PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES IMt iM✓ Wily Klmle »Horn FUTURE YEAR (2022) > Y TRIP GENERATION & DISTRIBUTION SUMMARY Traffic Lyman Blvd 14,75uu o N I T I ^ ' I I 1 pp0 1 � \ I v / ♦ / r Pioneer Trail I ICmleyoHom PEAK HOUR TOTAL TRAFFIC FUTURE YEAR (2022) VOLUMES - OPTION A I Epp 1 i L v E/ r - �" • / 1 �J / . ♦ / Pioneer Trail i .LEGEND_._ _. IGmIeyDFlOm FUTURE YEAR (2022) PEAK HOUR TOTAL TRAFFIC VOLUMES - OPTION S x.. 0 1 Traffic is L ec 94 � rr .14 r -fy ag LYOAO Bcuxro�q �y P tih ti''ll ' s 1144�i_ t� L glir Jlt. = -h�tilr �a L h' i� s tilr : L i i 71r Kimiey >)Hom FUTURE INTERSECTION CONTROL AND LAN[ASStONEt[NTS Next Steps • Open House — February 28 — 5:00 to 7:00 pm • PC Public Hearing March 7 • Finalize Draft of Full AUAR • Present full draft to City Council March 13 • Publish in EQB Monitor April 3 • Address comments • City Council Consideration May 8 SIGN IN Name Please leave your contact information so we can send you more details about the AUAR update! "Mail ddress Phone Number '(S-2-ii37-9 r, 1712 ' 3Vd-V (,/2- 7/ -.4-- SIGN IN Please leave your contact information so we can send you more details about the AUAR update! m Name E-Mail Address Phone Number oRa�a Cam. C� - die '�s�-/9to- 27s7 7I2<.t1VI&e- D("fit l uI," e - J,,CL c)2CA (B 4kC'O. cis. S2 `/S7 919 iz �zirk 9� - b'y3- 3135' G y(- j�6- -,4A Ag 000s9 ,�tlJ. � �� i• N� , 227 l I � Ym C410(' Ok hoiroly horrft(l. COM CP512JS 03 /ris. IN r-DI lod W431C 11 CO I �u0 lie'-C f0w), �d 9 j ce r Zo 3 egC) Yu/ 9SZ-yi I? vt oy ('ccevl � �iitcp1�O.2a`� t�d�( ¢�i), QSa.3&g, t>,��`( I� e_rP' ar J �a L�.�Jc%1� cps 9 s'a ,o 03c � 1 k4117I[�J��(/j�2Q j (JCLv14r/Cdl+t 9sa-�sz-S8'7c� '�Kr /A//NkAJ 5,4,Ji _Zii �+�'A-'7il ii �a �nunsrx..�MCi�IS (.COfl qS2-¢-ro �l/i�2 Chanhassen 2005 AUAR Update Public Comments received from the 28 February Open House Approximately 34 signed in to the meeting. The following comments are verbatim from comment sheets offered by participants. Names were included relative to each comment if provided by commenter. 1. Concept B- Keep the wetlands; consider it to be a true lifestyle center with walking and beauty, etc. 2. 1 appreciate being notified and asked for input. 3. Very concerned about increased traffic on Bluff Creek Blvd. causing congestion, safety and nuisance noise concerns. Increased traffic "calming" would be appreciated. 4. Would be nice to have a "walkable" retail component instead of large parking lots. 5. 1 am concerned about leaving the integrity of the land that we have grown accustomed to, trees lining the property would be nice. What will the noise be during construction and after? What will the hours be of the businesses? The noise that late in the evening restaurants make? 6. Sounds like you have a great plan for the place 7. Strong interest in the following concepts: a. Non 'chain -like' restaurants, including fine dining and/or a sports bar. b. Grocery store — Hyvee?? c. Daycare Center— New Horizon 8. Looking forward to seeing the plan come to life —very exciting development for Chanhassen. It's definitely needed in our growing community. 9. In regards to the round -a -bouts, the one we currently have existing within Liberty on Bluff Creek, everyone in the majority fly through them. So if pleasing to use round -a - bouts for Avienda, etc... you really need a new plan for slowing traffic down because they currently do not really work. — Lori and Corey Hothen 10. Really need speed barriers due to Avienda not doing anything, at the time did not address this issue. Please look at doing something to seriously address this issue. — Lori and Corey Hothen 11. My husband and I currently live within Liberty on Bluff Creek, not far at all from where you are going to be building Aviende. — Lori and Corey Hothen 12. Need to keep the current home owners in consideration when building: noise, traffic, etc. —Lori and Corey Hothen 13. Make sure construction traffic does not go through neighborhoods. 14. Do whatever is necessary to keep traffic increase on Bluff Creek Drive to a minimum 15. Would like lifestyle to be more walkable — not have to cross parking lots to go between stores, Concept A is not walkable in my opinion. 16. Owner of acreage at 1190 Lyman, I am greatly concerned about the environmental aspect of impact. I like my land and adjoining areas and observe the eagles, hawks, falcons that are protected also, the deer and other fauna that are on our land need open space. — Erik T. Dale 17. 1 have been a part of Chanhassen for 27 years and know you've done very well. I respect the need for growth. However I purchased acreage with my wife here because it was quiet, serene. So, hours of construction of operation of business. — Erik T. Dale 18. Lastly, the height of proposed offices on Lyman of Powers is critical to all in the expansive neighborhood. — Erik T. Dale 19. Concern: Safety of my family, neighbors, and visitors. I live off of Lyman Blvd., north of proposed development. Only access to my home is directly off of Lyman Blvd. (Right in, right out). —50% of the traffic do not slow down when I am turning into my driveway, leaving us with a difficult choice of slowing down and taking risk of someone hitting us back or make a turn to our driveway at a higher speed. So I would like a solution. —Asim (952-994-7885) 20. Are there any statistics or for how many office parks are already in the area? — Jeff rev- demars@gmaiLcom 21. Additionally what is the demand for housing? — Jeff rey-demars@gmailcom 22. It would seem to me that there would be a greater demand for shops stores and commerce considering there are plenty of homes in the area, plenty of buildings, but shopping and retail are at a more of a minimum? — Jeffrey-demars@gmaiLcom DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Ecological and Water Resource 1200 Warner Road St. Paul, MN 55106 April 17, 2017 Transmitted Electronically Kate Aanenson Community Development Director 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: Chanhassen AUAR 2016 Update Dear Kate Aanenson, The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has reviewed the Chanhassen 2005 Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) 2016 Update. We offer the following comments. As noted in the section guidelines on page 22, prior consultation with the DNR Natural Heritage program for information about reports of rare plant and animal species in the vicinity is required for an AUAR. NHIS Reviews are valid for one year and are project and location specific. The results for one project will not necessarily be the same for another project, even if they are in the same general area. Therefore, using a Review for another project (page 23 notes an Environmental Impact Statement for the TH 212/312 expansion project contains additional information) may not be appropriate. In addition, the records presented in the 2017 AUAR are from communications that occurred in 2005. New records are added to the Natural Heritage Database on a daily basis and referring to data that was obtained in 2005 without prior consultation is not recommended. We strongly recommend that all projects be reviewed by the Minnesota Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program prior to submitting an AUAR for public review. That said, an approximate one -mile radius of the project area was reviewed by DNR. Based on this review, there are no new known occurrences of rare features within the project area. There is an occurrence of a Minnesota Biological Site of High Biodiversity located just southwest of the project area that should be identified; this area is also designated as a Central Region Regionally Significant Ecological Area. These, and other natural resource GIS layers can downloaded from the Minnesota Geospatial Commons website at htt �// isdata mn gov/eproup/51522a54-9af5-4f06-blad- 73cdb814cf65?organization=us-mn-state-dn r. As noted in the EAW Guidance Form, the AUAR should discuss whether the planned projects may potentially affect rare features. While there were no known occurrences identified within the project area itself, several were noted to have been identified within 1-2 miles that could potentially be indirectly affected as a result of project activities. The AUAR should include a discussion on how features identified may be impacted by the project. Thank you for the consideration of our comments. Sincerely, /s/ Rebecca Horton Region Environmental Assessment Ecologist Minnesota Department of Natural Resources • Ecological and Water Resources 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106 1 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION April 17, 2017 Kate Aanenson City of Chanhassen PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 SUBJECT: Chanhassen 2016 AUAR MnDOT Review # AUAR17-002 Metropolitan District Waters Edge Building 1500 County Road B2 West Roseville, MN 55113 NW Quad US 212 and Powers Road (CR17), South of Lyman Blvd (CR18) Chanhassen, Carver County Dear Ms. Aanenson: Thank you for the opportunity to review the 2016 Chanhassen AUAR. Please note that MnDOT S review of this AUAR does not constitute approval of a regional traffic analysis and is not a specific approval for access or new roadway improvements. As plans are refined, we would like the opportunity to meet with our partners and to review the updated information. MnDOT's staff has reviewed the document and has the following comments: Design Continue to work with MNDOT on any of the proposed state highway changes suggested in this report. Any changes to the TH 212 interchange will require a Level 1 Layout review and approval. Diane Langenbach, MnDOT Area Engineer, can help guide you the process. For questions regarding these comments, contact Nancy Jacobson (nanc�.l.iacobsonna state.mn.us or 651-234-7647) in MnDOT's Metro Design Section. Review Submittal Options: MnDOT's goal is to complete the review of plans within 30 days. Submittals sent in electronically can usually be turned around faster. There are four submittal options. Please submit either: 1. One (1) electronic pdf. version of the plans. MnDOT can accept the plans via e-mail at metrodevreviews.dotAstate.mn.us provided that each separate e-mail is under 20 megabytes. 2. Three (3) sets of full size plans. Although submitting seven sets of full size plans will expedite the review process. Plans can he sent to: MnDOT — Metro District Planning Section Development Reviews Coordinator 1500 West County Road B-2 Roseville, MN 55113 An equal opportunity employer MnDOT Metropolitan District, Waters Edge Building, 1500 County Road B2 West, Roseville, MN 55113 3. One (1) compact disc. 4. Plans can also be submitted to MnDOT's External FTP Site. Please send files to: fti3://ftp2.dot.state.mn.us/pub/incoming/MetroWatersEdge/Planning Internet Explorer doesn't work using ftp so please use an FTP Client or your Windows Explorer (My Computer). Also, please send a note to metrodevreviews.dotAstate.mn.us indicating that the plans have been submitted on the FTP site. If you have any questions concerning this review, please contact me at (651) 234-7784. Sincerely, '0* Karen Scheffing Principal Planner CC: Nancy Jacobson, Design Hailu Shekur, Water Resources Merlin Kent, Traffic Clare Lackey, Traffic Engineering Doug Nelson, Right -of -Way Buck Craig, Permits Diane Langenbach, Area Engineer Natalie Ries, Noise Bruce Wetherbee Russell Owen, Metropolitan Council MnDOT Metropolitan District, Waters Edge Building, 1500 County Road B2 West, Roseville, MN 55113 Op, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road North I St. Paul, Mkvwsota 551554194 1 651-296-OW SM1657-38" 1 Use your preferred relay sere I Info.pca@state".us I Equal OPPortunity Ettgdoyer April 17, 2017 Ms. Kate Aanenson Community Development Director City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: Chanhassen 2005 Metropolitan Urban Service Area Alternative Urban Areawide Review Update Dear Ms. Aanenson: Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) Update for the Chanhassen 2005 Metropolitan Urban Service Area project (Project) located in the city of Chanhassen, Carver County, Minnesota. The Project consists of on -going development of a 625-acre area. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) staff has reviewed the AUAR Update and have no comments at this time. We appreciate the opportunity to review thisProject. Please provide the notice of decision on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement. Please be aware that this letter does not constitute approval by the MPCA of any or all elements of the Project for the purpose of pending or future permit action(s) by the MPCA. Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the Project proposer to secure any required permits and to comply with any requisite permit conditions. If you have any questions concerning our review of this AUAR Update, please contact me via email at Karen.kromar@state.mn.us or via telephone at 651-757-2508. Sincerely, i Karen Kromar Planner Principal Environmental Review Unit Resource Management and Assistance Division KK:bt cc: Dan Card, MPCA, St. Paul Teresa McDill, MPCA, St. Paul DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY ST. PAUL DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS 180 FIFTH STREET EAST, SUITE 700 f)j ST. PAUL, MN 65101-1678 REPLY TO ATTENTION OF REGULATORYBRAWN Regulatory File No. MVP-2017-00998-JTB THIS IS NOT A PERMIT Brad Scheib Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. 123 North 3rd Street, Suite 100 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Dear Mr. Scheib: We have received your submittal described below. You may contact the Project Manager with questions regarding the evaluation process. The Project Manager may request additional information necessary to evaluate your submittal. File Number: MVP-2017-00998-JTB Applicant: City of Chanhassen Project Name: Chanhassen, City of / Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) Received Date: 03/28/2017 Project Manager: Justin Berndt 651-290-5446 Justin.T.Berndt@usace.army.mil Additional information about the St. Paul District Regulatory Program, including the new Clean Water Rule, can be found on our web site at http://www.mvp.usace.army.mil/missions/regulatory. Please note that initiating work in waters of the United States prior to receiving Department of the Army authorization could constitute a violation of Federal law. If you have any questions, please contact the Project Manager. Thank you. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers St. Paul District Regulatory Branch Carver County TO& Words Adminirtratwrt 1136076ghtuay 212 Operanom Suite 1 Program Dertuvy Cbkgnt, MW 55322-8016 ,Parks Those (952) 466-5200 Taz(952) 466-5223 April 19, 2017 City of Chanhassen c/o Kate Aanenson Re: Development Review Comments: Chanhassen AUAR Update 2016-2017 — Powers Blvd— TH-212--Pioneer Trail —Bluff Creek Drive —Audubon Road —Lyman Blvd Thank you for the opportunity to review the subject development in the City of Chanhassen. Consistent with the County Comprehensive Plan and County Codes, the following are comments and recommended conditions of approval as requirements for an updated AUAR and any necessary permits to be issued for the project and specific development parcels / proposals: 1. Related to traffic and infrastructure, and AUAR Figure 24, please provide for County review and approval an additional sub -report and figures of detailed intersection and related segment geometric design concepts with estimated costs, schedule by year, and table of proportionate cost sharing for the City, Developments, MnDOT, and County consistent with the County's cost participation policy. Costs to include intersection / lane upgrades; signal interconnect and signal / fiber communications; and lighting as needed. Intersections and related traffic movements with a LOSE' or'F' and/or intersections highlighted for traffic signals may require additional lanes / capacity or widening. In addition, plans for future, long term improvements may require upgrades to the Powers Blvd and TH 212 intersection(s) including adding a second lane on the TH 212 / Powers Blvd Westbound On -Ramp. This depends on the level of SB Left Turn volumes and the overall intersection green times and phasing. Powers Blvd at Pioneer Trail may also require dual SB/EB left turn lanes, more in the long term. As a note, such improvements should be balanced with scales and considerations for pedestrian crossings and operations and maintenance impacts and costs. 2. Related to traffic and infrastructure, and AUAR Figure 24, provide for County review and approval an additional sub -report and figures of the existing and County Comprehensive Plan recommended rights of way, including parcels adjacent to the AUAR related properties. 3. Related to stormwater and infrastructure, and AUAR Figure 17, provide for County review and approval some type of additional, declarative sub -report and figures of the specific plans and impacts to the stormwater and ditches on each County highway related to the AUAR. 4. Related to parks and trails, provide for County review and approval some type of additional, declarative sub -report and figures of the specific plans and impacts to the City and County regional and linking trails plan for the highways and areas related to the AUAR. 5. Related to utilities and infrastructure, provide for County review and approval some type of R:\Program Delivery\Transportation\Development Review\2017\2017-1 additional, declarative sub -report and figures of the specific plans and typical cross-section on each County highway related to the AUAR. 6. Provide for County review and approval at least prior to 30% plans and specs of roadways or access points intersecting with County highways. Specific areas of concern are that the Bluff Creek Drive road extension from Powers Blvd be designed for 2-lanes inbound through and around the proposed internal roundabout, such that adequate throughput is achieved at the critical Powers Blvd / TH 212 intersection. This 2-lane inbound for Bluff Creek Blvd is also consistent with the AUAR's notation for dual NB left tums on Powers Blvd at TH 212. 7. Prior to any work affecting or on County highways or in County right of way, the applicant shall coordinate plans with the County Engineer and obtain a Utility or Excavating/Filling/Grading Permit(s) from Carver County Public Works: (http://www.00.carver.mn.us/how-do-i/ar)r)ly-for/a-permi ). Final details of locations, grades, and profiles affecting County roads as well as any utility connections will need to be reviewed and approved prior to any permits. 8. Any damages, modifications, or changes incurred on County highways from current or approved conditions will need to remedied or updated at development expense, induding costs incurred by the County. These are comments at this time. If you have any questions or need further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me at dmccormidk(a)co.carver.mn.us or by phone at (952) 466-5208. Sincerely. Dan McCormick, P.E. PTOE Transportation Manager Carver County Public Works cc: Chad Braun (TE / Permits) R:\Program Delivery\Transportation\Development Review\2017\2017-1 jam1111 hUmsesota Board of Wr6Soil Resources w October 19, 2016 Kate Aanenson City of Chanhassen PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Ms. Aanenson, VIA Email: kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us I have reviewed project number 2016-25, known as the Avienda-Chan Retail Site. I am concerned that the project proposer has not accounted for the nearly 5.5 acres of wetland that exist on the site. These wetlands are regulated by the MN Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) under MN Rule 8420. My understanding is that this site includes a tributary watershed to both Lake Susan, an impaired water and Bluff Creek, an impaired watercourse. Wetlands are recognized as having important functions and values, including: stormwater retention, water quality treatment, wildlife habitat and others. The WCA purpose is to achieve a no net loss in the quantity, quality and biological diversity of Minnesota's wetlands. Although the WCA allows for replacement of these functions and values where avoidance is not feasible, it does not preclude the project from being reviewed for adequacy under the MN Rule 8420.0520 Sequencing. This rule says that a project must first demonstrate wetland avoidance alternatives and minimizes wetland impacts. Although the WCA does not regulate the rezoning of property the current plan as proposed, does not address the requirements as outlined in the state wetland rules. I encourage the applicant to meet early with the reviewing agencies as part of their planning process. Sincerely, Ben Meyer Wetland Specialist MN Board of Water and Soil Resources Cc. Terry Jeffery, City Aaron Finke, Carver SWCD Melissa Jenny, Corps of Engineers Ken Powell, BWSR Becky Horton, DNR Kristen Larson, Carver Co. Brainerd Detroit Lakes Duluth Mankato Marshall New Ulm Rochester St. Cloud St. Paul St. Paul Office 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, MN 55155 Phone: (651) 296-3767 www.bwsr.state.mn.us TTY: (800) 627-3529 An equal opportunity employer JaTSED ST4Je S A UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION 5 77 WEST JACKSON BOULEVARD ��Ja� PRDT�c�o CHICAGO, IL 60604-3590 AM0 5 2517 REPLY TO THE ATTENTION OF WW-16J Chad Konickson Chief, Regulatory Branch U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District 180 51h Street East, Suite 700 St. Paul, MN 55101-1678 Re: Public Notice #2015-03075, Mixed use development, City of Chanhassen Minnesota - Dear Mr. Konickson: The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has reviewed the subject public notice issued on March 3, 2017 and the associated Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 permit application for the proposed Avienda mixed use Regional/Lifestyle Center Planned Unit Development Chanhassen, Carver Co., Minnesota The applicant, Level 7 Development, LLC, proposes to impact a total of 4.55 acres of wet meadow, shallow marsh, seasonally flooded basin, and open water wetland, as well as 715 linear feet of two drainage ditches, for the purpose of constructing a retail hub of specialty shops and restaurants, anchor retail, local supporting retail, hospitality, medical and professional offices, and townhomes and apartments. We offer the following comments based on our review: Project Purpose The applicant's basic project purpose of a mixed use development, including retail, restaurants, office space, and residential housing, is considered to be a non -water dependent activity. EPA does not believe the project requires access to, proximity to, or siting within streams or wetlands. Practicable alternatives that do not require access or proximity to or siting within the special aquatic site are presumed to be available.) The applicant has not provided enough information to justify use of one site for all proposed t development types. The City of Chanhassen 2030 Comprehensive Plan, as well as the 2006 and 2014 market studies, which were cited to support the need for a mixed use development, have not been provided and little information on their contents has been submitted. From the information provided thus far, the individual components of the development exhibit no interdependence. In fact, each development type could be constructed on different sites, which would reduce impacts to aquatic resources and not compromise the project's viability. For this reason, it is difficult to discern whether, as required by the 404(b)(1) Guidelines (Guidelines), all appropriate steps to avoid and minimize wetland impacts were considered T 40 C.F.R. § 230.10(ax3) RecycledlRecyclable a Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100%Recycled Paper (100% Post -Consumer) during site selection. EPA recommends the applicant provide further information on the interdependence of each proposed development type in order to determine if appropriate impact avoidance has been considered. If this information cannot be provided, the applicant's project purpose can only be viewed as overly broad and the preferred design cannot be supported as the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative (LEDPA). Off -Site Alternatives Analysis The applicant identifies a list of site selection criteria in order to determine alternative site practicability. Criteria cited are that the site be a tract of contiguous land that is 90+ acres in size, located within one half mile of the intersection of a four lane highway/freeway and an existing arterial road, generally square or rectangular in shape, and accessible from two locations via arterial roads. No justification for the listed criteria has been provided. The applicant also goes on to list minimum acreages needed for each `required" project component and claims there is a housing density requirement for the site but provides no supporting documentation. As of now, we understand the proposed development is purely speculative with no contractual obligations or users in mind for any developable space. EPA recommends that more information be provided to support the siting criteria listed. If supporting information cannot be famished, then the siting criteria can only be viewed as arbitrary and overly restrictive and the preferred design cannot be supported as the LEDPA. On -Site Alternatives The applicant dismisses several alternative site designs that minimize wetland impacts more than the preferred design due to multiple factors it claims would result in a non -viable project. These factors include: a contiguous flowing traffic system in which to circulate traffic as required by the City; physically separated offices that are visually distanced from retail uses; anchor retaiVentertainment/hospitality being visually distanced from specialty retail; disconnected and isolated uses eliminating `project synergy;" disconnected and isolated uses not providing an inviting and comfortable walking environment as required by the City; not providing sufficient project components as stated in the applicant's purpose and need; and not meeting use diversity requirements set forth by the applicant. No information has been provided supporting the city requirements for walking environments or traffic flow. Additionally, no information suggesting decreased project viability through wetland impact minimization has been provided. EPA recommends that supporting information regarding the effects of wetland impact minimization on project viability be provided. Without this information, the applicant's preferred design cannot be supported as the LEDPA. EPA recommends denial of a permit as currently proposed for this project because it does not comply with the Guidelines due to an overly broad project purpose and inadequate alternatives analysis. Additional information on the avoidance and mitigation of impacts to aquatic resources is necessary. Please notify us of Level 7 Development's response to these comments and any changes to the permit application. 2 Notice of Updated AUAR Available for Review The Chanhassen 2005 AUAR was originally prepared to facilitate development within a planned growth area based on the 2020 Comprehensive Plan. This AUAR is an update to the original AUAR. The area covered by the update has not changed; however, the development scenarios have been modified to incorporate the City's updated 2030 comprehensive plan, the portions of the study area that have developed since the original AUAR was adopted, and recent proposed development. Since 2005, Highway 212 has been constructed, four subdivisions have been platted throughout the project area, and Bluff Creek Boulevard, a major collector, has been partially constructed. A Concept PUD (called Avienda) was approved by Planning Commission and the City Council in 2015. The proposal includes approximately 118 acres of regional commercial, office, and medium/high density residential development. The updated AUAR and Mitigation Plan are available for public review from March 27tb through April 17t". Copies can be accessed via the city website at www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us at Chanhassen City Hall (7700 Market Boulevard, Chanhassen, MN 55317), or at the Chanhassen Library (7711 Kerber Blvd., Chanhassen, MN 55317). Please submit questions to: Kate Aanenson Community Development Director 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1139 kanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Mayor Laufenburger and City Council Members, We are a group of concerned residents who live near the proposed Avienda development on the SW corner of Lyman and Powers Blvd. While we are very excited for the potential this development can bring to our community, there are issues that we believe must be addressed. Below we have listed our primary concerns and have also provided solutions that we feel will help guide the development into a sustainable and desirable community asset, and not just what the developer wants. We appreciate your time and effort in looking into our concerns and look forward to your response regarding their viability and any suggestions as to how the solutions may be implemented. Our first concern is the potential traffic on Bluff Creek Blvd and the safety risk for the current residents. • Bluff Creek Blvd interconnects the residential areas of Pioneer Pass, Liberty, and the Preserve at Bluff Creek, which services local families and young children. Please note that there are about 120 homes in the Preserve at Bluff Creek alone, and multiplying that with the MN census average of 2 children per household, that's 240 children in the immediate residential area along Bluff Creek Blvd from one neighborhood alone. If connected directly to the Avienda development without limiting through traffic, we are deeply concerned that Bluff Creek Blvd will become very difficult for pedestrians to cross, and potentially unsafe to cross by children in the neighborhood. • We are also concerned that the AUAR under -estimates the potential traffic increase since it does not seem to take into account that Bluff Creek Blvd is the most direct route between Avienda and to areas in the Southwest direction. Anyone traveling from the Southwest will use this route instead of going around the "main" roads to Avienda. Please see the Google Maps screenshot (at bottom) which automatically maps Bluff Creek Blvd and Or as the fastest route if you want to get from the corner of Pioneer Trail and Audubon Rd to the planned Southwest entrance of Avienda. We already have an issue with individuals who don't reside in the neighborhoods using Bluff Creek Blvd as a pass through to avoid traffic lights. With the planned additional stop lights along Lyman Blvd, Pioneer Trail, and Powers Blvd, and the fact that Bluff Creek will now be connected to something of interest for non-residents, we feel that pass through traffic will become an even larger safety issue. • Solutions — We understand that Bluff Creek Blvd must be connected on the North side, but we are concerned with the significant increase in transient traffic in the residential area by having it be a direct path to the development area. Perhaps Bluff Creek Blvd could have its own connection with Lyman Blvd by connecting it due north from where it currently terminates. Avienda will then have its own access and exit which will not interfere with residents along Bluff Creek Blvd. Another option is to discourage non-resident, pass through or transient traffic as much as possible to and from Avienda. This could be done by restricting sections of Bluff Creek Blvd to residential access only and closing it to through traffic, and/or making the connection less direct for through traffic. The current traffic calming strategy of narrowing the lanes on Bluff Creek Blvd at Pioneer Pass Park and using roundabouts do next to nothing on preventing fast, pass through traffic. Please do not utilize this strategy as the only strategy for traffic calming for the Avienda development. Finally, since there are many families and children who cross Bluff Creek Blvd, please have the development focus on providing safe ways to cross this street, perhaps through the use of a sequence of speed bumps, and providing a large median for pedestrians to cross. We are also concerned with the type of development the developer is planning based upon current concepts for Avienda. We hold dear the natural landscape and beautiful scenery that exists around our neighborhood and in the development area. We welcome a development which shares those same values. However, looking at the proposed plans for Avienda, especially option A, we get the impression that the developer wants to pave over this land to cram in as many building and parking lots as possible, counter to the class and charm the residents, council members and Mr. Akradi have previously encouraged. • Development option A does not fit with the image of Chanhassen which places priority on green space and aesthetics. This option "pancakes" the entire scenic rolling hills and wetlands of the current landscape in the development area. It also removes a far larger section of the forest than was originally described in early project meetings. This area is found in the secondary zone of the Bluff Creek Overlay and is part of the Big Woods habitat of what the DNR defines as old - growth forest. Nearly all of option A's land use is allocated for large building and parking lots. The proposal itself allocates 0% of the land to parks or green space. • We are concerned that the developer wants to create another "me too" big box experience. We already have plenty of this type of development represented in the suburban area. Option A tries to cram in as many stores as possible and doesn't create anything unique when compared with other nearby cities and their offerings. • Option A favors large big box stores. Big box stores are struggling in today's online economy and relying on these types of stores in the future does not make sound financial sense. • Solution — Preserve the wetlands and forests, and keep as much green space as possible so they can be used as assets to create a unique experience for visitors. The retail economy has shifted towards providing shoppers an experience such as locally owned stores, aesthetic and walkable green open spaces (please recall previous city council meeting references to downtown Excelsior). This unique experience is what will keep visitors returning to this development for years to come, as well as promoting a sense of community for the residents in the nearby area. Please support the development of something more like option B vs. option A, with an increased focus on utilizing the topography while preserving and retaining local wetlands and old growth habitat. High density residential space • While we understand the need for additional housing we are concerned with how it's being planned for execution. Looking at Option A, a large multi -story, high density apartment complex would be right across the street from single family homes. This is a very jarring transition that is just not seen elsewhere in the suburbs and appears to conflict with local planning ordinances and city codes. Many residents along the border with the planned development are very J concerned with seeing parking lots, and large commercial and residential building towering over their house whenever they look out the window. • We are concerned with the size/capacity of the proposed luxury high density residential building. The Wall Street Journal, MSN money as well as other news sources have written about how the demand for luxury rental has cooled and will continue to decline. Such a large building may no longer be supported by the market. https:J/www.ws i. com/a rticl es/I uxu ry-a pa rtm ent-boom-I ooks-set-to-fizzle-i n-2017-1483358401 https://www. m s n. co m/e n-us/news/other/I ux u ry-a pa rtme nt-boom-loo ks-set-to-fizzle/a r- BBxOvNA • Solution - We would much rather see a transition from the existing low density housing to medium density housing along the entire shared border between the existing residential area and Avienda. Also, we would rather not have a high density residential space built, but if it is, it should be moderately sized and should have placed with a good buffer between existing single family homes. These are all aspects more reflected in Option B. Hotels • We are concerned with having hotels being proposed in the development and having people not from the community in such close proximity to a residential area as well as to the Chanhassen High School. • We do not understand the need for additional hotel space in Chanhassen. We do see that there is a peak in interest for Paisley Park. However, we should not be building permanent establishments to accommodate for short term peak activity. We are doubtful that the existing hotels in Chanhassen are at max capacity on a consistent basis and do not believe that the market will support another hotel in the long run. • Solution — do not have hotels as part of the development. At minimum have the developer provide vetted financial analysis that another hotel is sustainable and if one must be built, it should be placed away from existing residential areas. Sincerely, Your fellow Chanhassen residents at the Preserve at Bluff Creek Bluff Creek Boulevard 40,40 1,3 F0 3 min 04LOd Ort�nen 40 QBolton q k Pioneer Trail ��oneer Rroae Go gle Name Address Signature c��t��(✓1 �l/�Q{� `II )�5� ge7l^CS�Q �� r 'Gt�-JC � G� /-�.�� gJ�l �+ rev I�a�/�17r• ICJ• �- IPRAMDD PUTTA ISDZ M* p✓vle- WNW Ions VlIw G VA' Px, A v \),.s t, 1 I j o�c, y �,U-w `III 1 J � U Name Address Signature !! C C��tha Fit-�ia� 9151 PG vet zx-K DY N 31� ch l �LZo blltndlle tri c k Z ��l�d �� C�`a✓rlilSSb' NW SS�1� L \ 0 1y31 C--V\o-Y\6o;c.e.n MQ Mr/ 0&6� q� fL qaq A' 5�n _ /a�i.. l ¢t ePSoN v C��shv�iYss�N� S�3! 7 �IIVX Name Address Signature ,��c�� ti � � z o(��►u ems /� Mkat'`' 1 �►3� L�e��e�(�� C; �et� J J o v /t/, y/ '1 u644 SIB/ 1-d . �(r•�/� 4 �ALyPrIQ 14so �phSCy � `� M,4vvcL-7i VA90N K PAi1vATAn 6ul R�31 R%vVR ROCK fl(L �j CICVIMA (z vwaa- a G-4AwAs4sn1 C `i C;,CIC 6CO Ak— Name Address Signature 4 p' `1"�i� %-Ilia-Y&cc CPAti, M A. V ' Gl k o D Iz f Ue/ ciCJc YJr lJ � do �� /Yl l� � (�'l U C(..��('11�•t� / �UU, moo 930/ P N-er �eqn C(. u(sseYL V'ki °l3zU R'Wr I�t � - N . Ck"taJbSF,r AAAJ < = /✓GGi+ �G4cntik C�w4as5e q271 Name Address Signature 1\ WVa\`) J 0 A G-7 Ile I C) f l o o JE"u R lss-rfo C-nJ V} L"r i e Gi I berf 1(pq1 L" O.ho-r,hCjLssen M �4 Aatcj� Q / Name Address Signature Loge N%o tt �C.SDA C �� 55�1�- Zhang Family 1455 Bethesda Or. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Y i1 [pP F`:EP YSE fY�p E'r�c a-yo� L��huige! 0." �1 � (fancy`' 7 7 cc Mare f glv� oox 1 4-7 �� lt�asse. . A,4 pU 5S 3 /7 WA1111 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road North 1 St. Paul, MN 55155-4194 1 w .pca nate.mn.us 4th Floor Ms. Kate Aanenson Community Development Director City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 oN •"';' U.S.POSTAGE )>PITNEreoWES wZIP 55155 � 000. s z� 02 1r1 a u. 00013981 16 APF;/f17 2017 RECEIVED APR 18 2017 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CQU—St•ii✓ 55317 �IIIrJIJrrI►ylllllrrlll'Irlllllrlllrrllr�ll'rILLI'Irl�lrIII 0.111N, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road North I St. Paul, Minnesota 55155♦194 1 651-296-6300 8004S7-3864 I Use your preferred relay service I info.pca@state.mn.us I Equal Opportunity Employer April 17, 2017 Ms. Kate Aanenson Community Development Director City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: Chanhassen 2005 Metropolitan Urban Service Area Alternative Urban Areawide Review Update Dear Ms. Aanenson: Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) Update for the Chanhassen 2005 Metropolitan Urban Service Area project (Project) located in the city of Chanhassen, Carver County, Minnesota. The Project consists of on -going development of a 625-acre area. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) staff has reviewed the AUAR Update and have no comments at this time. We appreciate the opportunity to review thisProject. Please provide the notice of decision on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement. Please be aware that this letter does not constitute approval by the MPCA of any or all elements of the Project for the purpose of pending or future permit action(s) by the MPCA. Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the Project proposer to secure any required permits and to comply with any requisite permit conditions. If you have any questions concerning our review of this AUAR Update, please contact me via email at Karen.kromar@state.mn.us or via telephone at 651-757-2508. Sincerely, �zv, W Karen Kromar Planner Principal Environmental Review Unit Resource Management and Assistance Division KK:bt cc: Dan Card, MPCA, St. Paul Teresa McDill, MPCA, St. Paul c Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road North I St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-4194 1 651-2966300 800657-3864 I Use your preferred relay service I 'nfo.pca@state.mn.us I Equal Opportunity Employer April 17, 2017 Ms. Kate Aanenson Community Development Director City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: Chanhassen 2005 Metropolitan Urban Service Area Alternative Urban Areawide Review Update Dear Ms. Aanenson: Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) Update for the Chanhassen 2005 Metropolitan Urban Service Area project (Project) located in the city of Chanhassen, Carver County, Minnesota, The Project consists of on -going development of a 625-acre area. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) staff has reviewed the AUAR Update and have no comments at this time. We appreciate the opportunity to review thisProject. Please provide the notice of decision on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement. Please be aware that this letter does not constitute approval by the MPCA of any or all elements of the Project for the purpose of pending or future permit action(s) by the MPCA. Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the Project proposer to secure any required permits and to comply with any requisite permit conditions. If you have any questions concerning our review of this AUAR Update, please contact me via email at Karen.kromarPstate.mn.us or via telephone at 651-7S7-2508. Sincerely, �WY G/✓61' ixA - Karen Kromar Planner Principal Environmental Review Unit Resource Management and Assistance Division KK:bt cc: Dan Card, MPCA, St. Paul Teresa McDill, MPCA, St. Paul DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY \� ST. PAUL DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS 180 FIFTH STREET EAST, SUITE 700 ST. PAUL, MN 55101-1678 0�� REPLY TO ATTENTION OF REGULATORY BRANCH Regulatory File No. MVP-2017-00998-JTB THIS IS NOT A PERMIT Brad Scheib Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. 123 North 3rd Street, Suite 100 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Dear Mr. Scheib: We have received your submittal described below. You may contact the Project Manager with questions regarding the evaluation process. The Project Manager may request additional information necessary to evaluate your submittal. File Number: MVP-2017-00998-JTB Applicant: City of Chanhassen Project Name: Chanhassen, City of / Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) Received Date: 03/28/2017 Project Manager: Justin Berndt 651-290-5446 Justin.T. Berndt@usace.army.mil Additional information about the St. Paul District Regulatory Program, including the new Clean Water Rule, can be found on our web site at hftp://www.mvp.usace.army.mil/missions/regulatory. Please note that initiating work in waters of the United States prior to receiving Department of the Army authorization could constitute a violation of Federal law. If you have any questions, please contact the Project Manager. Thank you. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers St. Paul District Regulatory Branch DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION April 17, 2017 Kate Aanenson City of Chanhassen PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Metropolitan District Waters Edge Building 1500 County Road B2 West Roseville, MN 55113 SUBJECT: Chanhassen 2016 AUAR MnDOT Review # AUAR17-002 NW Quad US 212 and Powers Road (CR17), South of Lyman Blvd (CR18) Chanhassen, Carver County Dear Ms. Aanenson: Thank you for the opportunity to review the 2016 Chanhassen AUAR. Please note that MnDOT's review of this AUAR does not constitute approval of a regional traffic analysis and is not a specific approval for access or new roadway improvements. As plans are refined, we would like the opportunity to meet with our partners and to review the updated information. MnDOT's staff has reviewed the document and has the following comments: Design Continue to work with MNDOT on any of the proposed state highway changes suggested in this report. Any changes to the TH 212 interchange will require a Level 1 Layout review and approval. Diane Langenbach, MnDOT Area Engineer, can help guide you the process. For questions regarding these comments, contact Nancy Jacobson (nancv.l.iacobson@,state.mmus or 651-234-7647) in MnDOT's Metro Design Section. Review Submittal Options: MnDOT's goal is to complete the review of plans within 30 days. Submittals sent in electronically can usually be turned around faster. There are four submittal options. Please submit either: 1. One (1) electronic pdf. version of the plans. MnDOT can accept the plans via e-mail at metrodevreviews.dotAastate.mn.us provided that each separate e-mail is under 20 megabytes. 2. Three (3) sets of full size plans. Although submitting seven sets of full size plans will expedite the review process. Plans can be sent to: MnDOT — Metro District Planning Section Development Reviews Coordinator 1500 West County Road B-2 Roseville, MN 55113 An equal opportunity employer MnDOT Metropolitan District, Waters Edge Building, 1500 County Road 132 West, Roseville, MN 55113 3. One (1) compact disc. 4. Plans can also be submitted to MnDOT's External FTP Site. Please send files to: frn://f!p2.dot.state.mn.us/pub/incoming/MetroWatersEdge/Planning Internet Explorer doesn't work using ftp so please use an FTP Client or your Windows Explorer (My Computer). Also, please send a note to metrodevreviews.dot(&state.mn.us indicating that the plans have been submitted on the FTP site. If you have any questions concerning this review, please contact me at (651) 234-7784. Sincerely, "I,* Karen Scheffing Principal Planner CC: Nancy Jacobson, Design Hailu Shekur, Water Resources Merlin Kent, Traffic Clare Lackey, Traffic Engineering Doug Nelson, Right -of -Way Buck Craig, Permits Diane Langenbach, Area Engineer Natalie Ries, Noise Bruce Wetherbee Russell Owen, Metropolitan Council Mn DOT Metropolitan District, Waters Edge Building, 1500 County Road B2 West, Roseville, MN 55113 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION April 17, 2017 Kate Aanenson City of Chanhassen PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Metropolitan District Waters Edge Building 1500 County Road B2 West Roseville, MN 55113 SUBJECT: Chanhassen 2016 AUAR MnDOT Review # AUAR17-002 NW Quad US 212 and Powers Road (CR17), South of Lyman Blvd (CR18) Chanhassen, Carver County Dear Ms. Aanenson: Thank you for the opportunity to review the 2016 Chanhassen AUAR. Please note that MNDOT s review of this AUAR does not constitute approval of a regional traffic analysis and is not a specific approval for access or new roadway improvements. As plans are refined, we would like the opportunity to meet with our partners and to review the updated information. MnDOT's staff has reviewed the document and has the following comments: Design Continue to work with MNDOT on any of the proposed state highway changes suggested in this report. Any changes to the TH 212 interchange will require a Level 1 Layout review and approval. Diane Langenbach, MnDOT Area Engineer, can help guide you the process. For questions regarding these comments, contact Nancy Jacobson(nancv.l.iacobsont7a,state.mn.us or 651-234-7647) in MnDOT's Metro Design Section. Review Submittal Options: MnDOT's goal is to complete the review of plans within 30 days. Submittals sent in electronically can usually be turned around faster. There are four submittal options. Please submit either: 1. One (1) electronic pdf. version of the plans. MnDOT can accept the plans via e-mail at metrodevreviews.dotAstate.mn.us provided that each separate e-mail is under 20 megabytes. 2. Three (3) sets of full size plans. Although submitting seven sets of full size plans will expedite the review process. Plans can be sent to: MnDOT — Metro District Planning Section Development Reviews Coordinator 1500 West County Road B-2 Roseville, MN 55113 An equal opportunity employer MnDOT Metropolitan District, Waters Edge Building, 1500 County Road B2 West, Roseville, MN 55113 3. One (1) compact disc. 4. Plans can also be submitted to MnDOT's External FTP Site. Please send files to: ftp://fty2.dot.state.mn.us/nub/incoming/MetroWatersEdge/Planning Internet Explorer doesn't work using ftp so please use an FTP Client or your Windows Explorer (My Computer). Also, please send a note to metrodevreviews.dotAstate.mn.us indicating that the plans have been submitted on the FTP site. If you have any questions concerning this review, please contact me at (651) 234-7794. Sincerely, 1191* Karen Scheffing Principal Planner CC: Nancy Jacobson, Design Hailu Shekur, Water Resources Merlin Kent, Traffic Clare Lackey, Traffic Engineering Doug Nelson, Right -of -Way Buck Craig, Permits Diane Langenbach, Area Engineer Natalie Ries, Noise Bruce Wetherbee Russell Owen, Metropolitan Council MnDOT Metropolitan District, Waters Edge Building, 1500 County Road B2 West, Roseville, MN 55113 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Ecological and Water Resource 1200 Warner Road St. Paul, MN 55106 April 17, 2017 Kate Aanenson Community Development Director 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: Chanhassen AUAR 2016 Update Dear Kate Aanenson, Transmitted Electronically The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has reviewed the Chanhassen 2005 Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) 2016 Update. We offer the following comments. As noted in the section guidelines on page 22, prior consultation with the DNR Natural Heritage program for information about reports of rare plant and animal species in the vicinity is required for an AUAR. NHIS Reviews are valid for one year and are project and location specific. The results for one project will not necessarily be the same for another project, even if they are in the same general area. Therefore, using a Review for another project (page 23 notes an Environmental Impact Statement for the TH 212/312 expansion project contains additional information) may not be appropriate. In addition, the records presented in the 2017 AUAR are from communications that occurred in 2005. New records are added to the Natural Heritage Database on a daily basis and referring to data that was obtained in 2005 without prior consultation is not recommended. We strongly recommend that all projects be reviewed by the Minnesota Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program prior to submitting an AUAR for public review. That said, an approximate one -mile radius of the project area was reviewed by DNR. Based on this review, there are no new known occurrences of rare features within the project area. There is an occurrence of a Minnesota Biological Site of High Biodiversity located just southwest of the project area that should be identified; this area is also designated as a Central Region Regionally Significant Ecological Area. These, and other natural resource GIS layers can downloaded from the Minnesota Geospatial Commons website at https://gisdata.mn.gov/group/51522a54-9af5-4f06-blad- 73cd b814cf65 ?organization=us-m n-state-dnr. As noted in the EAW Guidance Form, the AUAR should discuss whether the planned projects may potentially affect rare features. While there were no known occurrences identified within the project area itself, several were noted to have been identified within 1-2 miles that could potentially be indirectly affected as a result of project activities. The AUAR should include a discussion on how features identified may be impacted by the project. Thank you for the consideration of our comments. Sincerely, /s/ Rebecca Horton Region Environmental Assessment Ecologist Minnesota Department of Natural Resources • Ecological and Water Resources 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106 • L A N D F O R M • • From Site to Finish 105 South Fifth Avenue Tel: 612-252-9070 Suite 513 Fax: 612-252-9077 Minneapolis, MN55401 www.landform.net April 14, 2017 Kate Aanenson City of Chanhassen PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 RE: Chanhassen 2016 Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) Update DRAFT Dear Kate, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the AUAR draft. Our Avienda development team has reviewed the draft document and we hope that you would consider these items as you finalize the document: Page 11 of the draft document discusses the Bluff Creek Watershed Natural Resources Management Plan. The language regarding the primary zone should be revisited because it states "This area is intended to be preserved in its natural state. First choice is City ownership of this area. A number of flexible land use techniques such as conservation zoning, conservation easements, public purchase, cluster development, transfer of development rights and public dedication are noted as appropriate tools to achieve community objectives." However, it is our understanding that 1) the City does not want to own the portion of this area on the Avienda site and 2) the City has asked the Avienda developer to construct a fire lane through this area, which has significant impact on this area. It may be more accurate to include a statement that impacts to this area should be minimized. 2. Page 12, paragraph 1 has a typo: "sites" should be "cites". 3. Page 17 (Question 8) includes a list of permits and approvals required in the AUAR area. We simply wish to note that our Avienda project will not require Conditional Use Permits or a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, but others in the area may be required these approvals. 4. Page 22 references Wetlands B and C, but there is no reference to show where these are located. 5. Page 23, second paragraph in the wetland section states that 10 wetlands drain to Bluff Creek. Wetlands 3-6 and 10 in the Avienda project drain to Bluff Creek but the others drain to Lake Susan. 6. Page 43 states that "The Bluff Creek Overlay zoning ordinance contains provisions that require a detailed analysis of habitat conditions prior to development. This analysis is provided as part of the preparation of development plans. Staff will verify the findings of the work and will work with developers to design projects in a manner that protects and preserves these habitat areas." It is not clear what "a detailed analysis of habitat conditions" is or how the developer would provide the requested information. LBnMartn•. Se *'•. SI 1. F.N•ve,egsle,M--mils Wl.—Rd-1 Srni UC 7. Page 47 is part of the Monitoring of Development in the AUAR Area and Future Updates to the AUAR section and includes the statement "Development within any subarea delineated in the AUAR would exceed the maximum levels assumed for that subarea in the document or is of a different land use type." It is our understanding that that the "different land use type" is a general term. Specifically, it is our understanding that the land use for the Avienda project area is "Regional Lifestyle Center" and that the mix of uses within the development may vary from the concepts included in the AUAR, but that the maximum levels of impacts (traffic, infrastructure, etc.) may not be exceeded. 8. It is unclear why the wetland on Figure 14A (concept A) is not shown as development area as that is the full development scenario. 9. The AUAR assumes two WB lanes will be constructed on Bluff Creek Boulevard at the intersection of the TH 212 North ramps and Powers Boulevard (matching the assumed future lane configuration when the 212 ramps were built). Having two through lanes coming directly into the proposed development from a freeway will lead to higher vehicle speeds on Bluff Creek Boulevard. It will also lead to more vehicle weaving (lane changes) in the 450' between the intersection with Powers Boulevard and Avienda Drive. These two outcomes will likely lead to an increase in the frequency and severity of crashes relative to a single lane entrance, which would eliminate the need for weaving and result in lower vehicle speeds. Toole Design Group analyzed the operations of the Bluff Creek Boulevard/Powers/TH 212 intersection with a single WB lane on Bluff Creek Boulevard and found that the overall intersection operations would result in LOS C for both the AM and PM peak under development scenario A for the year 2022 buildout, the same outcome as the AUAR. Depending on future growth rates, our analysis found the second lane on Bluff Creek Boulevard would not provide an operational advantage until year 2032 or later. We can share our analysis or discuss this outcome further upon request. It's possible to construct Bluff Creek Boulevard in a manner that a second lane can be added easily later at a date, should traffic volumes increase to the point where the operational advantages of having a second lane at the Powers/212 intersection outweigh the potential crash risks. We suggest that the AUAR be modified to recommend the construction of a single westbound lane on Bluff Creek Boulevard, until a point in time at which traffic levels warrant the construction of a second westbound lane after weighting operation benefits and crash risks. Our analysis of Lyman Boulevard and Sunset Trail concurs with Kimley Horn's analysis that a signal would be warranted for the year 2022 buildout condition. We look forward to adoption of the final document at the May 81 City Council meeting. Please feel free to contact me at klindahl(a landform.net or 612.63830225 if you have any questions. Kate Aamnson April 14, 2017 t • Sincerely, Landform f.Au.✓wHa��;. Kendra Lindahl, AICP Principal Planner COPY: Mark Nordland, Launch Properties Kate Aanenson April 14, 2017 Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act Replacement Plan: Complete Application Checklist Local Government Unit (LGU) Address Citv of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard, PO 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Applicant Name Project Name Date of Application Application Level 7 Development, LLC Avienda Dated 2/15/17; received Number with model 2/21/17 17-01W12P Check yes or no or leave blank if not applicable: GENERAL APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS Item # Yes No 1) ® ❑ Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Form for Water/Wetland Projects. 2) ® ❑ The full name, post office address, and telephone number of applicant. 3) ® ❑ For corporations, the principal officers of the corporation, any parent companies, owners, partners, and joint venturers, and a designated contact person. 4) ® ❑ Managing agents, subsidiaries, or consultants that are or may be involved with the activity. 5) ® ❑ The location of project by township, range, section, and quarter section. 6) ® ❑ Evidence of ownership of the project area or the requisite property rights to perform the activity. The city has this information 7) ® ❑ An accurate map, survey, or recent aerial photograph showing the boundaries of the project area and boundaries, size, and type of each wetland relevant to the activity. 8) ® ❑ A written description of the proposed project and project area, including its areal extent, with sufficient detail to allow assessment of the amount and types of wetland to be affected. FOR THE IMPACTED WETLAND Item # Yes 9) ® No ❑ Square feet or acres of wetland proposed to be impacted by type (Circular 39 and Eggers & Reed). 10) ® ❑ The minor watershed, major watershed, county, and bank service area. 11) ® ❑ A soil survey map of the site showing soil type and identifying hydric soils (where available). This is in the wetland delineation report dated October 1, 2015 12) ® ❑ A map showing locations of any surface inlets or outlets, natural or otherwise, draining into or out of the wetland and, if the wetland is within the shoreland wetland protection zone or floodplain, the distance and direction to the nearest watercourse. The hydrocad model indicates a 54" round culvert with invert 896.27 at Powers Blvd. 13) ® ❑ Information concerning the special considerations criteria in MN Rule 8420.0515 (if known or readily available). 14) ❑ ® A list of all other known local, state, and federal permits and approvals required for the activity. Sequencing Analysis: 15) ® ❑ Project purpose and relevant requirements identified, and detailed project description included. 16) ® ❑ Detailed description of project alternatives considered, including: 17) ® ❑ At least 2 project alternatives that avoid wetland impacts described and/or shown (only 1 required for projects that repair or rehabilitate existing infrastructure) 18) ® ❑ 19) ❑ ❑ Wetland impact minimization efforts identified Description of proposed rectification activities for any temporary wetland impacts (if applicable) 20) ❑ ® Description of BMPs planned to protect wetland functions after project completion (if applicable). 21) ❑ ® Information on the applicability of sequencing flexibility (if applicable as determined by the LGU) This has not been provided by the applicant so it is the city's understanding that the applicant is not BWSR Forms 7-12-10 Page 1 of 2 FOR THE REPLACEMENT WETLAND WHEN REPLACEMENT IS PROJECT -SPECIFIC Yes No 22) ❑ ❑ The proposed action(s) eligible for credit from MN Rule 8420.0526 is identified. 23) ❑ ❑ The minor watershed, major watershed, county, and bank service area of the proposed wetland replacement area(s). 24) ❑ ❑ Evidence of ownership or property rights to the replacement area(s). 25) ❑ ❑ Information concerning the special considerations criteria in MN Rule 8420.0515 (if known or readily 26) ❑ ❑ available). A description of how the proposed replacement meets the ecological suitability and sustainability 27) ❑ ❑ criteria under MN Rule 9420.0522, subpart S. A map showing locations of any surface inlets or outlets, natural or otherwise, draining into or out of the replacement wetland(s) and, if the replacement wetland is within the shoreland wetland protection zone or floodplain, the distance and direction to the nearest watercourse. 28) ❑ ❑ Scale drawings showing plan and profile views of the replacement wetland area(s). 29) ❑ ❑ A description of how the replacement area will be constructed; the type, size and specifications of any outlet structures; elevations, relative to mean sea level, of key features; and best management practices that will be implemented to prevent erosion or site degradation. 30) ❑ ❑ A soil survey map of the site showing soil type and identifying hydric soils (where available) and site - specific soils information sufficient to determine the capability of the site to produce and sustain wetland characteristics and achieve replacement goals. 31) ❑ ❑ A timetable that clearly states how and when implementation of the replacement plan will proceed and when construction of the replacement area will be completed. 32) ❑ ❑ Signed statements by the applicant in accordance with MN Rule 8420.0330, Subpart 3, Item B(11). 33) ❑ ❑ Evidence that a person proposing to create or restore a wetland within the easement of a pipeline has first notified the easement holder and the director of the Office of Pipeline Safety in writing. 34) ❑ ❑ A list of all other known local, state, and federal permits and approvals required for the replacement 35) ❑ ❑ activity. Evidence that any drainage or property rights potentially detrimental to the replacement area have been acquired, subordinated, or otherwise eliminated. 36) ❑ ❑ A vegetation establishment and management plan according to MN Rule 8420.0528, Subp. 2, Item D. 37) ❑ ❑ The size, type, and credits expected to result from the proposed replacement actions. FOR REPLACEMENT BY WETLAND BANKING Yes 38) ® No ❑ The account number(s) of the wetland bank where credits are proposed to be withdrawn. 39) ® ❑ The minor watershed, major watershed, county, and bank service area of the bank site. 40) ❑ ® The amount of replacement credits to be withdrawn in square feet. Credits to be withdrawn are 41) ❑ ® shown In acres. A completed application for withdrawal of replacement credits from the wetland bank(s) or a purchase agreement signed by the applicant and bank account holder. For all replacement plans: 42) ❑ ® A summary description of the required replacement as determined according to the proposed impacts and replacement actions and the replacement standards in MN Rule 8420.0522. Note: If any of the above items are checked "No," the application is incomplete. For incomplete applications, the LGU must notify the applicant within 15 business days of receipt of the application and list in writing what items or information is missing. If notification is not provided within 15 business days, the LGU must make a decision on the application or work with the applicant to voluntarily withdraw or revise it. The application is: ❑ complete ® incomplete BWSR Forms 7-12-10 Page 3 of 2 For incomplete applications, describe the information needed to make the application complete: The application is complete for the following reasons: ) C r-'s • Per 8420.0748 Subp 2 and noted in the application form, the applicant must provide documentation indicating that they have contacted the wetland bank account owner, the owner has credits available to sell, and the owner is willing to sell the credits . ei Per the WCA checklist, the amount of replacement credit to be withdrawn needs to be in a square feet. Per 8420.0330 Subp A. 6, a list of all other known local, state, and federal permits and approvals required for this activity. This should also acknowledge the necessity to complete the AUAR Update_ or other environmental review process prior local approvals being provided. If and when the application becomes complete and is out on a comment period, based on the letter from the City of Chanhassen dated January 25, 2017, and a review of the submittals to date, the following information will be further evaluated with the applicant. The applicant may want to provide additional supporting information as soon as available, if applicable: • Evaluation of 8420.0515 with respect to consistency with TMDLs, non -degradation, Lake Susan UAA plans. • Effect the proposed project will have on the MnDOT mitigation area to the east and south. Currently, the provided hydrologic model shows a decrease in the subwatershed area providing hydrology to some of these mitigation areas. • Effect the proposed project will have on WL3. The hydrologic model and applicant indicates a decrease in the subwatershed area providing hydrology to this remaining wetland. Evaluation that the lost functions and values are adequately replaced. Evaluation that the outlets to WL1, WL1/2, WL2, and WL7 are adequately shown in their existing conditions. • Evaluation of the sequencing discussion and documented need for the project in conformance with WCA. • Correction on Part Four of the application o!rt4e size of the aquatic resource vs the size of the impact for Wetland 9. • Other considerations outlined in theJanuary�0 er from thee ty to Melissa Barrett • The county and township listing for the NLEB is out of date and should be updated for purposes of permitting. Signature: Date: rq� oK- olgme Zvi II increay. BWSR Forms 7-12-10 Page 4 of 2 TooleDesignGroup 212 Third Avenue North, Suite 476 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612.584.4094 w Aooledesign.com Jd:I L Is] XI ZI.illky, Date: March 2, 2017 To: Kendra Lindahl, AICP, Landform CC: Chris Bower PE, Toole Design Group From: Hannah Pritchard, PE PTOE, Toole Design Group Project: Avienda Development Re: Bluff Creek Boulevard Traffic Analysis - Draft Summary The purpose of this memo is to summarize the traffic analysis performed for two intersections related to the Avienda development: • Powers Boulevard/Bluff Creek Boulevard/ US-212 WB Ramp (existing signal) • Bluff Creek Boulevard/Avienda Parkway (proposed roundabout) The analysis was performed for the AM and PM peak hours for the 2022 build out year for the site. The proposed roadway layout would operate at an acceptable level of service during both time periods. 2032 and 2042 analyses were also performed; see below for assumptions related to that analysis. By 2032, changes to the Powers Blvd / Bluff Creek Blvd may be necessary to accommodate increased traffic on the US-212 WB Off -Ramp. By 2042, additional changes may be needed to address traffic on Powers Blvd. Data Traffic volumes for the build out year (2022) for the AM and PM peak hour were obtained from the Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) traffic analysis currently being performed by Kimley-Horn & Associates on behalf of the City of Chanhassan. Traffic volumes at the Bluff Creek Blvd / Avienda Blvd intersection were estimated based on entering and exiting volumes for the site. Synchro models that PLANNING ENGINEERING - LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE contained signal timing information for the Powers Blvd intersection were also provided from the AUAR analysis. Volumes in these models were had been modified assuming a 1.5% per year background growth rate from the date the counts were taken up to 2022. For information on site trip generation and trip distribution, see the AUAR documentation. Methodology Traffic operations at the two intersections were reviewed using a combination of software packages. For the roundabout analysis and information regarding the relationship between the two closely spaced intersections, TOG used the SIDRA INTERSECTION 7 software package. SIDRA uses an iterative application of an algorithm to evaluate intersection operations. It performs a lane -based analysis that is particularly applicable to roundabout operations. SIDRA's iterative analysis also determines the backward spread of congestion, and provides highly accurate queuing measures. The signalized intersection at Powers Blvd / Bluff Creek Blvd was included in the SIDRA analysis. Synchro/SimTraffic was also used to confirm output values and calibrate the SIDRA model against the AUAR analysis. Signal timings at the intersection optimized in Synchro and then entered into SIDRA. Because the relationship between the queuing at the Powers Blvd / Bluff Creek Blvd intersection is a critical detail for the analysis, SIDRA and SimTraffic microsimulation were both used to confirm queuing results. Network Laneage The network laneage evaluated for the study intersections for the 2022 peak hour is shown in Appendix 1. Bluff Creek Blvd was modeled as a two-lane road and the roundabout at Bluff Creek Blvd / Avienda Blvd was assumed to be one lane. At the intersection with Powers Blvd, Bluff Creek Blvd widens to include one left -turn and one right -turn storage lane. The through lane becomes a thru/right-turn shared lane. Two right turn lanes help reduce queueing for the heavy eastbound right turn movement during the PM peak hour. Although there are currently two northbound left turn lanes from Powers Blvd onto Bluff Creek Blvd, one northbound turn lane was found to be sufficient for the 2022 analysis. The intersection is also already built for two westbound left -turn lanes from US-212 onto Powers Blvd, although only one is being utilized under existing conditions. Results Build Out Year - 2022 Table 1 provides a summary of operations at the two study intersections. Detailed SIDRA and SimTraffic output are provided in Appendix 1. All movements at the Bluff Creek Blvd / Avienda Blvd roundabout intersection were found to operate at LOS A during both time periods. Queue lengths entering the roundabout were generally no more than three cars. Overall level of service at the Powers Blvd / Bluff Creek Blvd was LOS C for both time periods. PLANNING ENGINEERING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE TABLE 1: OPERATIONS SUMMARY TABLE Year 2022 Build Out AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Powers Blvd & Bluff Creek Blvd Approach Storage (ft) Delay sec LOS 95th %tile Queue (ft) Delay Js2EL LOS 95th %tile Queue (ft) SIDRA SimTraffic SIDRA SimTraffic EB Bluff Creek Left 400 25.0 C 46 59 29.0 C 127 118 EB Bluff Creek Thru 500 21.4 C 67 85 24.7 C 141 196 EB Bluff Creek Right 400 3.9 A 69 57 16.4 B 274 156 WB US-212 Ramp Left - 25.4 C 231 142 35.5 D 479 386 WB US-212 Ramp Thru 300 31.4 C 293 261 39.0 D 311 326 WB US-212 Ramp Right 300 5.2 A 220 195 3.0 A 98 210 NB Powers Left 550 46.5 D 206 154 53.0 D 239 193 NB Powers Thru - 36.7 D 374 215 48.7 D 238 163 NB Powers Right 270 0.4 A 2 27 2.0 A 8 36 SB Powers Left 580 53.0 D 87 83 43.5 D 349 261 SB Powers Thru - 42.9 D 258 135 45.9 D 498 281 SB Powers Right 275 4.6 A 1 47 4.4 A 49 64 Overall 27.8 C - - 34.2 C - - Bluff Creeck Blvd & Avienda Pkwy Approach Storage (ft) Delay sec LOS 95th %tile Queue (ft) Delay sec LOS 95th %tile Queue (ft) SIDRA SIDRA EB Bluff Creek - 7.3 A 34 7.6 A 50 WBBluff Creek 500 6.6 A 56 6.7 A 85 NB Driveway - 5.7 A 18 7.7 A 47 SBAvienda 9.9 A 21 11.1 B 52 Overall 7.1 A - 8.0 A - During the AM peak hour, the SIDRA analysis indicated that all movements would operate at LOS D or better, and all queue lengths were substantially shorter than available storage length. During the PM peak hour, the SIDRA analysis indicated that the 95th-percentile queue fort he eastbound movements for Bluff Creek Blvd at Powers Blvd would not extend back to into the roundabout -the eastbound right turn 95th-percentile queue was 274 feet. SimTraffic results confirmed that the queue lengths would not extend back into the roundabout. In addition, the SIDRA analysis showed that the westbound left and through movement off of the US-212 Ramp at the Powers Blvd / Bluff Creek Blvd intersection may experience long queues during the PM peak hour. The ramp configuration results in storage for the westbound through and right -turn movements. Queues for the westbound through were shown to be longer than the available storage. Delay for these movements are still at an acceptable level (LOS D), but the addition of a second left turn lane would address these queueing issues. Future Conditions 2032 Based on the background growth rate used for the AUAR, a 1.5% per year growth rate was applied to the traffic volumes at the study intersections. This growth rate would result in a 16% increase in traffic over the ten years after the development is opened. This 16% increase in traffic was applied uniformly to the SIDRA and SimTraffic models'. Traffic signal timings were optimized to accommodate this increase. Intersection operations with this additional traffic are summarized in Table 2. With this increase in traffic, queue lengths on the WB US-212 ramp become an issue during the AM and PM peak hour. Signal timings that favor the WB approach allow the WB left lane to operate at LOS C; however, the anticipated queue length for this movement is 551 to 732 feet. In addition, using so much of the cycle length to provide sufficient green time to the WB approach results in LOS E operations for the NB and SB Powers Blvd approaches. Table 3 shows the 2032 PM peak hour operations assuming the addition of a second westbound left turn lane. This would be a low-cost improvement, since there is already an unused lane in place for this turn lane. An additional traffic signal head may be needed. Mitigated conditions were not tested for the AM peak hour. ' The uniform application of a constant growth rate provides an estimate of future traffic, but it is only an estimate. Changes in near -by land use patterns, or mode shifts from automobile travel to other modes could result in additional growth for some movements, and less growth (or even decline) for others. The results of the future conditions analysis should be considered in the context of other deciding factors, such as pedestrian and motorist safety, aesthetics, and community values. ., %, R..,_, :i'1. 1ra _I TABLE 2: OPERATIONS SUMMARY TABLE Powers Blvd & Bluff Creek Blvd Year 2032 U nm AM Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour 95th %tile I I I 95th %tile Storage I Delay I I I (Delay Approach (ft) sec LOS SIDRA SimTraffic sec LOS ISIDRA SimTraffic EB Bluff Creek Left 400 25.9 C 54 88 26.5 C 138 175 EB Bluff Creek Thru 500 21.3 C 78 123 29.8 C 220 263 EB Bluff Creek Right 400 4.8 A 89 83 23.9 C 364 239 WB US-212 Ramp Left - 26.5 C 236 300 34.9 C 551 732 WB US-212 Ramp Thru 300 32.9 C 302 385 36.0 D 350 437 WB US-212 Ramp Right 300 6.5 A 251 344 3.8 A 133 271 NB Powers Left 550 48.4 D 245 183 73.2 E 320 674 NB Powers Thru - 35.2 D 431 244 49.3 D 280 366 NB Powers Right 270 0.5 A 3 24 2.9 A 11 43 SB Powers Left 580 58.4 E 106 92 64.1 E 490 430 SB Powers Thru - 43.4 D 303 161 58.9 E 621 369 SB Powers Right 275 5.8 A 40 53 6.0 A 68 119 Overall - 28.8 C - - 40.8 D - - Bluff Creeck Blvd & Avienda Pkwv Approach Storage (ft) Delay sec LOS 95th %tile Queue (ft) Delay sec LOS 95th %tile Queue (ft) SIDRA 51DRA EBBluff Creek - 7.7 A 43 8.4 A 66 WBBluff Creek 500 6.8 A 72 8.4 A 115 NB Driveway - 6.0 A 23 7.0 A 62 SBAvienda - 10.3 B 27 11.9 B 68 Overall - 7.4 A - 8.5 A TABLE 3:OPERATIONS SUMMARY TABLE 2032 PM Peak Hour Unmitigated Mitigated Powers Blvd & Bluff Creek Blvd Approach Storage (ft) Delay sec LOS 95th %tile Queue (ft) Delay (sec) LOS 95th %tile Queue (ft) SIDRA SimTraffic SIDRA SimTraffic EB Bluff Creek Left 400 26.5 C 138 175 45.4 D 178 251 EB Bluff CreekThru 500 29.8 C 220 263 25 C 154 310 EB Bluff Creek Right 400 23.9 C 364 239 14.7 B 315 253 WB US-212 Ramp Left - 34.9 1 C 551 732 35.8 1 D 1 269 340 WB US-212 Ramp Thru 300 36.0 D 350 437 45.6 D 392 382 WB US-212 Ramp Right 300 3.8 A 133 271 3.9 A 132 327 NB Powers Left 550 73.2 E 320 674 54 D 281 253 NB Powers Thru - 49.3 D 280 366 47.5 D 275 187 NB Powers Right 270 2.9 A it 43 7.3 A 17 34 SB Powers Left 580 64.1 E 490 430 39 D 389 316 5B Powers Thru 58.9 E 621 369 40.1 D 558 321 SB Powers Right 275 6.0 A 68 119 6 A 68 299 Overall 40.8 D - - 33.7 C Bluff Creeck Blvd & Avienda Pkwy Approach Storage (ft) Delay sec LOS 95th %tile Queue (ft) Delay (s2.SL LOS 95th %tile Queue (ft) SIDRA SIDRA EBBluff Creek - 8.4 A 66 8.4 A 66 WBBluff Creek 500 8.4 A 115 8.4 A 115 NB Driveway - 7.0 A 62 7.0 A 62 SBAvienda 11.9 B 68 Ell 11.9 B 68 Overall 8.5 A - 8.5 A PLANNING ENGINEERING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Future Conditions 2042 The application of a 1.5% growth rate would result in a 35% increase in traffic over the twenty years after the development is opened. While some additional traffic to the development may be expected over twenty years, the increased traffic on Powers Blvd and the US-212 ramps would be largely due to nearby land use changes. Much of this traffic could be expected at the Powers Blvd / Bluff Creek Blvd intersection with or without the proposed development. For this analysis, this 35% increase in traffic was applied uniformly to the SIDRA and SimTraffic modelsz. Traffic signal timings were optimized to accommodate this increase. PM peak hour intersection operations with this additional traffic are summarized in Table 4. With this large increase in traffic, there are a number of points of failure in the existing lane configuration. Queues on the US-212 ramp could extend across the entire 1700-foot off ramp onto the freeway. NB and SB left turn movements also operate at LOS F with long queues. In order to mitigate these operations, the second left -turn lane added for the WB US-212 ramp for the 2032 conditions would need to be combined with other capacity improvements. The addition of a second SB left from Powers Blvd onto the US-212 ramp would be the most effective capacity addition at the intersection. A 35% increase in traffic would result in a SB left turn volume of 343 vehicles per hour during the PM peak hour. The approach lanes for the second NB left turn is already in place, but is unused in the 2022 buildout. A mitigation scenario could take advantage of this already present lane. However, the addition of a second northbound left turn lane would necessitate the addition of a second receiving lane on Bluff Creek Blvd. An initial evaluation of two entering lanes approaching the roundabout at Bluff Creek Blvd / Aveinda Pkwy indicated that transitioning the additional lane to a turn lane onto Avienda Blvd could result in weaving issues between drivers changing lanes. Alternatively, dropping the second entrance lane before the roundabout resulted in an under -utilization of the second turn lane at the intersection. Drivers tend to position themselves away from a lane that the know is going to end. Finally, there could be significant aesthetic or right-of-way implications with the addition of a second WB lane since it would reduce the available space for landscaping in the current cross-section. Therefore, the addition of this second lane into the development is not recommended. 2042 conditions were not tested for the AM peak hour z The uniform application of a constant growth rate provides an estimate of future traffic, but it is only an estimate. Changes in near -by land use patterns, or mode shifts from automobile travel to other modes could result in additional growth for some movements, and less growth (or even decline) for others. The results of the future conditions analysis should be considered in the context of other deciding factors, such as pedestrian and motorist safety, aesthetics, and community values. PLANNING - ENGINEERING - LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE TABLE 4: OPERATIONS SUMMARY TABLE 2042 PM Peak Hour Unmitigated Mitigated Powers Blvd & Bluff Creek Blvd Approach Storage (ft) Delay sec LOS 95th %tile Delay (sec) LOS 95th %tile SIDRA SimTraffic SIDRA SimTraffic EB Bluff Creek Left 400 26.1 C 154 265 43.4 D 201 253 EB Bluff Creek Thru 500 39.3 D 283 399 30.3 C 236 326 EB Bluff Creek Right 400 31.1 C 473 358 22.4 C 430 295 WB US-212 Ramp Left - 38.7 D 670 457 36.7 D 315 404 WB US-212 Ramp ThrU2 300 34.5 C 404 1711 49.9 D 483 1606 WB US-212 Ramp Right 300 5.3 A 188 249 5.3 A 186 508 NB Powers Left 550 127.5 F 490 850 62.3 E 351 401 NB Powers Thru - 65.1 E 371 774 36.1 D 282 189 NB Powers Right 270 4.0 A 15 46 1.3 A 9 50 SB Powers Left 580 83.8 F 652 940 50.1 D 247 181 5B Powers Thru - 110.2 F 974 1346 30.8 D 782 476 5B Powers Right 275 8.0 A 92 536 3.8 A 96 235 Overall 59.9 1 E I - 38.4 1 D - - Bluff Creeck Blvd & Avienda Pkwy Approach Storage (ft) Delay sec LOS 95th %tile Delay (sec) LOS 95th %tile SIDRA SIDRA EB Bluff Creek - 9.8 A 96 9.8 A 97 WB Bluff Creek' 500 7.3 A 155 7.4 A 159 NB Driveway - 10.1 B 91 10.1 B 91 SBAvienda - 12.6 B 116 12.7 B 118 Overall - 9.5 1 A - 9.1 A 'Unmitigated: Flow rate reduced due to capacity constraints at Bluff Creek/Powers ,,...-. E'46, e.:;r_; a. Conclusion The proposed development will result in an increase in vehicle traffic in the study area. However, in 2022, this increase can largely be accommodated by the existing facilities. A one -lane entrance to the development on Bluff Creek Blvd is sufficient, and the proposed one -lane roundabout would operate well. While the roundabout and traffic signal are relatively close to each other, queues from the traffic signal are not expected to extend into the roundabout. A 1.5% per year increase in traffic was assumed to estimate traffic at a 10-year and 20-year horizon. Due to the nature of compound growth, this resulted in an evaluation of 16% and 35% more traffic volume for the two future conditions, respectively. In addition, while some additional traffic to the development may be expected over ten or twenty years, the increased traffic on Powers Blvd and the US-212 ramps would be largely due to nearby land use changes. Much of this traffic could be expected at the Powers Blvd / Bluff Creek Blvd intersection with or without the proposed development. The results of the future conditions analysis should also be considered in the context of other deciding factors, such as pedestrian and motorist safety, aesthetics, and community values. At the 10-year horizon, the addition of a second westbound left -turn lane off the US-212 ramp may be necessary. At the 20-year horizon, the addition of a second WB will no longer be sufficient to mitigate traffic delays. The addition of a second SB left -turn lane would be the next logical step to mitigate this additional traffic. While the approach lane for an additional NB left is already in place, however adding a second NB left would also have significant implications for Bluff Creek Blvd within the site. If the 35% increase in traffic follow existing patterns, an additional SB left -turn lane would be more effective and have fewer negative impacts. This future improvement would require coordination with Mn/DOT and more significant construction at the Powers Blvd/Bluff Creek Blvd intersection. One option to address 20-year forecasted traffic is to implement a traffic monitoring program. If traffic volumes appear to be increasing at the forecasted rate, and are following the patterns assumed for this analysis, (e.g. large volumes of turns on/off the US-212 ramps), the most effective mitigation could be revisited. This approach has been used for the West End development in St Louis Park and has been recommended for the Vikings Headquarters development in Eagan. PI ANNINC, ENGINEERING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE WSB — 701 Xenia Avenue South I Suite 300 1 Minneapolis, MN 55416 1 (763) 5414800 Memorandum To: Melissa Barrett, Kjolhaug Environmental Mark Kjolhaug, Kjolhaug Environmental Mark Nordland, Launch Properties Peder Larson, Larkin -Hoffman Steven Sabraski, Landform Todd Gerhardt, City of Chanhassen Paul Oehme, City of Chanhassen Kate Aanenson, City of Chanhassen From: Andi Moffatt, WSB Date: March 15, 2017 Re: Avienda WCA Permit Application — Meeting Notes from March 9, 2017 WSB Project No. 1694-860 On behalf of the City of Chanhassen, please find a summary of the meeting between the city and the Avienda development group on March 9, 2017. • The meeting attendees are included on this memo. The Avienda team discussed their concern regarding the type of documentation and language that was used regarding the February 9, 2017 TEP meeting. It was reiterated by the city that the February 9, 2017 meeting was a courtesy meeting and that no decisions were made at the meeting. The Avienda team indicated their perspective that the use of the TEP Findings Report was not appropriate in this case if the meeting was not to result in any decisions and that the language in the Findings document prejudiced the decision process. The group determined that the Avienda team will send a letter to the city requesting the Findings Report be rescinded. • The group discussed who could act as LGU for the City. Todd Gerhardt indicated he would look into this with the city attorney. After the meeting, information from the attorney indicated the city is required to appoint a "technical professional with expertise in water resources management'. Todd Gerhardt appointed Andi Moffatt to the TEP panel for the Avienda project. • The drainage outlet for Wetlands 2, 1 /2, 1, and 7 was discussed as to whether there were other culverts in the drainageway. City staff indicated there is a buried (non-functioning) culvert at a field crossing. It was discussed if the culvert was not functioning, the stormwater model would show the drainage outlet rather than a culvert as the control for the wetlands. The group noted that the culvert under Powers Boulevard does exist and that is included in the model. • The drainage outlet and culverts were a point of discussion in past city/TEP meetings since it is a factor in the MnRAM assessments. Andi indicated that the details of the MnRAM assessments would be reviewed when the project was on review during the comment period. • The development team wanted to know the wetland credit/functions and values target for mitigation. The city indicated this would be further evaluated during the comment period based on the WCA rules. The attendees discussed that the purpose and need, sequencing, and mitigation would be Building a legacy —your legacy. Equal Opportunity Employer I wsbeng.com NV15.45lOr16Mibdotl017 (M15 MEMO FINAL WWII NMesdo March 15, 2017 Page 2 reviewed for conformance with WCA during the comment period. • The group reviewed the draft "Replacement Plan: Complete Application Checklist' that had been developed by the city based on the revised application received February 21, 2017. The group had no additions or revisions to the checklist. The checklist was signed by city staff at the meeting and emailed out to the development team and TEP on March 10, 2017. If you have questions, please feel free to call me at 763-287-7196 or email me at amoffatt(a)wsben(i.com. x\ISW�Mm\0.v\EOIJ_o3_IS M W HI Me xotn qed oN�►T rq From: Melissa Barrett[mailto:melissa(cDkiolhaugenv.coml Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2017 8:50 AM To: Nick McCabe <nick.mccabe(a)is-erp.com> Subject: RE: Request for price quote wetland bank credits Nick, Are the 6 acres of credit you mention below now available? If not yet, do you know when they will be? I am in search of -9.8 acres of credit. Thanks. Melissa Barrett Certified Wetland Delineator, Licensed Soil Scientist Kjolhaug Environmental Services, Inc. Office: (952) 401-8757 Cell: (952) 388-3752 From: Nick McCabe (mailto:nick.mccabe@is-grp.coml Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2016 8:21 AM To: Melissa Barrett <melissa@kiolhaugenv.com> Subject: RE: Request for price quote wetland bank credits Melissa, Right now we have a bunch of credits tied up in purchase agreements. We only have about 3.5 credits not under PAs. We expect to have a deposit of about 6 acres very soon though. That would put us at just under 9.5 credits. We would quote you $35k/credit. Please let me know if you have any other questions or would like to put together a purchase agreement as your project moves forward. Thanks Nick McCabe Senior Environmental Scientist Environmental Group 115 E. Hickory Street, Suite 300 Mankato, MN 56001 P: 507.387.6651 C: 507.330.4786 nick. mccabe(a)is-grp.com www.is-grp.com Architecture Engineering Environmental Planning f Win From: Melissa Barrett(mailto:melissa@kiolhaugenv.coml Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2016 2:44 PM To: Nick McCabe <nick.mccabe@is-grp.com> Subject: Request for price quote wetland bank credits Nick, I am working on a project that, if approved, will require around 11 acres of credit. Can you provide a non -binding quote for credits from you bank. Thank you. Melissa Barrett Certified Wetland Delineator, Licensed Soil Scientist Kjolhaug Environmental Services, Inc. Office: (952) 401-8757 Cell: (952) 388-3752 Melissa Barrett From: Jason Kirwin <jasonkirwin@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, March 10, 2017 9:13 AM To: Melissa Barrett Subject: Re: Request for bank credit price quote Melissa: We currently have 0.5635 acres of Shallow Marsh and 0.2622 acres of wetland credit available. Those credits are available at $0.99/sq ft as discussed. I expect a deposit of 10+ acres in the very near future (maybe next week). After that, we'd be willing to sell up to approximately 2.5 acres of Deep Marsh for $0.99/sq ft. We will have shallow marsh available also, but the price for those would be $1.06 and we want to hoard them as much as possible. All are Corps -approved. If interested, I can draft a PA in draft form to review. Thanks Jason Jason Kirwin - President ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTIFIC LLC. Office (320) 589-9893 1 Cell (320) 349-0794 jasonkirwin(Eamail com www.environmental-scientinc.com On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 10:50 AM, Melissa Barrett <melissa kjolhau¢env.com> wrote: I would need all of whatever you have left. Thanks. Melissa Barrett Certified Wetland Delineator, Licensed Soil Scientist Kjolhaug Environmental Services, Inc. Office: (952) 401-8757 Cell: (952) 388-3752 From: Jason Kirwin [mailto:iasonkirwin@amail.coml Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2017 10:48 AM To: Melissa Barrett <melissa@kiolhaueenv.com> Subject: Re: Request for bank credit price quote Melissa: We use our own purchase agreement. It's proven popular for us and our clients. How many credits do you need? I'll have to look at what we have available now. Jason Jason Kirwin . President ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTIFIC LLC. Office (320) 589-9893 1 Cell (320) 349-0794 ]asonkiminhDamail.com w .environmental-scientific.com On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 10:45 AM, Melissa Barrett <melissa n�kiolhaugenv.com> wrote: Jason, I would like to set up a Purchase Agreement for the remainder of your available credits. Can we do that, and what would be the breakdown? Thank you. Melissa Barrett Certified Wetland Delineator, Licensed Soil Scientist Kjolhaug Environmental Services, Inc. Office: (952) 401-8757 Cell: (952) 388-3752 From: Jason Kirwin lmailto:iasonkirwinCdemail.coml Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2017 3:53 PM To: Melissa Barrett <melissa@kiolhau¢env.com> Subject: Re: Request for bank credit price quote Yes. $ .99/sq ft. Jason On Mar 1, 2017 10:04 AM, "Melissa Barrett" <melissa(a kiolhaugenv.com> wrote: Jason, I have an upcoming project that will need to buy 0.96 ac of wetland credit (various subgroups ok). Do you have that amount available, and can you provide me with a price quote? Thank you. Melissa Barrett Certified Wetland Delineator, Licensed Soil Scientist Kjolhaug Environmental Services, Inc. Office: (952) 401-8757 Cell: (952) 388-3752 Melissa Barrett From: Eric Trelstad <eric@wetlandcreditagency.com> Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2017 11:12 AM To: Melissa Barrett Subject: Re: Price quote for upland Corps approved bank credits Sure Melissa - The bank still contains the entire 1.7458 credits as listed on the BWSR site. As far as a breakdown is concerned, if you mean a type breakdown, the 1.7201 credits that are listed as U's can be used in any combination of 3's or 4's, based upon how these credits would have been allocated had they been split into the wetland groups initially, as the Corps does now. If you propose these be used as either of these types and the Corps has any questions or concerns with this (although I doubt they will) I will discuss this with them. And pricing for over 1 acre of credits would stay at the $1.35 I quoted you earlier. Lastly, I am leaving late morning tomorrow for a spring break trip so if you would like a PA drafted sooner than later, please let me know today or first thing tomorrow. Otherwise, I will be back at my desk Friday of next week and happy to get it to you then. Thanks again Melissa! Eric Trelstad Wetland Credit Agency, LLC 612-360-4700 WETLAND CREDIT AGENCY, uC rre7Hedaredl ecoa�rra b i'ra�s andsders On Mar 9, 2017, at 10:49 AM, Melissa Barrett <melissa(d),kiolhauaenv.com> wrote: Eric, If we were to set up a purchase agreement for the remainder of your available credits: 1. How much do you have; 2. What is the breakdown; and 3. And what would be price/sf Thank you. Melissa Barrett Certified Wetland Delineator, Licensed Soil Scientist Kjolhaug Environmental Services, Inc. Office: (952)401-8757 Cell: (952) 388-3752 From: Eric Trelstad [mailto:eric(&wetlandcreditaaencv.coml Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2017 12:34 PM To: Melissa Barrett <melissa@kiolhaugenv.com> Subject: Re: Price quote for upland Corps approved bank credits According to how the Corps is currently depositing buffer credits, the buffer in Account #174 should be in -kind for Types 3 & 4. Does that help? Other than that, there's not much I can do other than our pricing does drop by $0.05 per sq foot for purchases over an acre, so if you're ratio is higher than 2:1 (which it sounds like would put you over an acre) we would be at $1.35 or $58,806. Hope that helps. Thanks again, Eric Trelstad Wetland Credit Agency, LLC 612-360-4700 <image001.png> On Feb 28, 2017, at 9:53 AM, Melissa Barrett <melissa&kjolhaugenv.com> wrote: Eric, Since the credits are upland and not wetland (and ideally I need wetland), I'm anticipating that the corps will make me replace at a higher ration than 2:1. Probably 2.25 or 2.5:1. Can you counter with a slight discount (15%- $1.20) for the non -wetland status of the credit? Thanks. Melissa Barrett Certified Wetland Delineator, Licensed Soil Scientist Kjolhaug Environmental Services, Inc. Office: (952) 401-8757 Cell: (952) 388-3752 From: Eric Trelstad [mailto:eric(twetlandcreditagency.coml Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2017 8:54 AM To: Melissa Barrett <melissa@kiolhaueenv.com> Subject: Re: Price quote for upland Corps approved bank credits Sorry for the wait Melissa. Account 4174 credits are currently priced a $1.40 psf or $60,984/acre. Let me know if this works and I'll put together a purchase agreement for you. Thanks! Eric Trelstad Wetland Credit Agency, LLC 612-360-4700 <image002.png> On Feb 27, 2017, at 3:32 PM, Melissa Barrett <melissa(a*iolhaugenv.com> wrote: Eric, Could I have a price quote for around 0.85 acre of upland corps approved credit from bank 174? Thank you. Melissa Barrett Certified Wetland Delineator, Licensed Soil Scientist Kjolhaug Environmental Services, Inc. Office: (952) 401-8757 Cell: (952) 388-3752 Chanhesser 200E a!ter ^a!ive Urban Areawide Review 2016 Update 8. Permits and approvals required. A listing of major approvals (including any comprehensive plan amendments and zoning amendments) and public financial assistance and infrastructure likely to be required by the anticipated types of development projects should be given. This list will help orient reviewers to framework that will protect environmental resources. The list can also serve as a starting point for the development of the implementation aspects of the mitigation plan to be developed as part of the AUAR. Table 8.1 presents a list of known local, state, and federal permits and approvals. Table 2-8 provides a list of known infrastructure and public financial assistance. TABLE 8.1 PERMITS AND REGULATORY REVIEW/APPROVALS Unit of Government Type of Permitlreview or Regulatory Citation (as may be City of Chanhassen Subdivision Approval City Code Chapter 18 rianneo umr ueveiopmem City Code Chapter 20, Article VIII Approval Rezoning City Code Chapter 20, Article II, Div. 2 Bluff Creek Overlay City Code Chapter 20 Article XXXI Conditional Use Permit Approval City Code Chapter 20, Article IV Site Plan Review Approval Wetland Alteration Permit City Code Chapter 20, Article VI Amendments Zoning Ordinance Amendments City Code Chapter 20, Article II, Div. 2 Amendment Minnesota Department of Natural Utility Crossings Permit MN Statute 103G, MN Rules Resources 6115.0810 Federal Endangered Species Natural Heritage Program Preservation Act of 1973, as Coordination amended in 1978, 1982, and 1988; MN Statutes Chapter 84.0895 MN Rules Chapter 6134 Section 404 Of The Clean Water Clean Water Act Section 404/10 Act Title 33CFR26 - Water U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Permits Pollution Prevention and Control Subchapter IV - Permits and Minnesota Department of Health Water Main Plan Review MN Rules 4720 Minnesota Pollution Control NPDES Permit MN Statute 115, MN Rules 7002 Sanitary Sewer Extension Permit Page 17 Chanhassen 2005 Alternative Urban Areawide Review 2016 Update Unit of Government Type of Perrnitlreview or Regulatory Citation (as may be approval noted) Indirect Source Grading Permit Metropolitan Council Sanitary Sewer Plan Approval Environmental Services Section 106 of the Historic Preservation Act, Protection of Minnesota State Historic Cultural Resource Coordination Historic Properties" (36 CFR Part Preservation Office 800), MN Statutes 138.31-.42, MN Private Cemeteries Act- MN Metropolitan Council Comprehensive Plan Amendment Metropolitan Land Planning Ad Minnesota Statutes Section Minnesota Environmental Quality Environmental Assessments Minnesota Rules 4410 Board (EQB) (AUAR) 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. Discuss past and current land use at the project's site. Generally, 'proximity" means within a mile or so of the project, however, the distance can be greater in specific instances. If a site assessment for past contamination has been done, include a brief summary of the results. Discuss what is adjacent to the site (all directions). Note any nearby features of concern, including areas where vulnerable populations live or visit such as nursing homes, schools, day care centers, water resources, parks, etc. • Indicate the distance and direction to the nearest residential receptor. Since air and water contamination can potentially travel in any direction, please include all residential areas surrounding the site. You may need to contact the city or county in which the project is located for information Past land use in the project area has been agricultural based uses, mostly row crops. Since the 2005 AUAR, much of the project area has developed to include low and medium density residential uses consistent with the assumptions established in the original AUAR. Included in the gross acreage calculations are 77 acres of wetland, 79 acres of floodway, and 168 acres of primary Bluff Creek Overlay District. The following table provides a breakdown of existing land use in the project area. Page 18 Chanhassen 2005 Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) Update March 2017 Agenda • Review the purpose of an AUAR • Discuss 2005 AUAR background and history • Review existing site conditions • Present and review alternative development scenarios • Review potential impacts and mitigation strategies: — Traffic/Transportation systems — Infrastructure Systems (potable water, sanitary sewer) — Storm water and drainage systems — Environmental/Natural Resources • Review next steps and project schedule Alternative Urban Areawide Review What is an AUAR? An Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) analyzes the potential environmental effects or impacts resulting from anticipated future development. The AUAR does not focus on a particular project but on a number of projects or developments expected to occur in an area over an expected period of time. The land use plan identified in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan will be used as the basis for evaluating impacts. The AUAR will also seek to identify methods of mitigating the impacts of the proposed development. The AUAR process will follow Minnesota State Rules, including the opportunity for the public and other governmental agencies to review and comment on the draft document. The AUAR will examine the potential impacts on areas such as: Natural resources Historic resources Park, recreation areas or trails Traffic Water, sewer and stormwater infrastructure PROJECT LOCATION I ' f E... h.11U Purpose of AUAR • Authorized by laws as a an alternative form of environmental review (alternative to an EAW and EIS) to analyze environmental impacts of certain development. • Part of the entitlement process when development triggers the warrants for an environmental review. • The AUAR does not approve a specific project for development. Rather it defines an order of magnitude and mitigation steps. CROSS ACRES TOTAL 624 ACRES Agriculture Use (row crop or pasture) 442 Acres Agriculture, Residential 174 Acres Residential Estate 9 Acres �OTHER AREA CALCULATIONS T.H. 212 Right -of -Way (approximate area) 125 Acres Wetlands (Chanhassen Wetland Inventory-452 acres and Bemardi Property delineated-8 8 acres) 54 Acres Hoodways/Roodplain 78 Acres Steep Slopes(Chanahassen inventory of 18%or greater slopes) 19Acres A - - --Csl Medium Density ResidentiaL2ow Density 120 8 du/acre 954 units Residential Medium Density 66 8du/acre 680units Residential _. TOTAL HOOSM uffs TOTAL NON-r1UMETMI 720,090 sgaam feet SQUARE FEET Park/noen Soace 45 Passive Perk Bluff Creek Overlay Primary District 200 Acres �•'" Institutional ® 'rounded to Key Takeaways , Proposed primarily residential and office uses n School for Chaska School District sited for NW quandrant 2005 AUAR square feet 36 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS Wetlands Floodway �r 4k, IF Bluff Crook Overlay Development Coestralets y � i Mne�vl R.IIII11111i5 J[ N N M - Ntl w, R' L $Kdl}11Y L C CJ M lull RnM.:ar t _'d+•Ln. U Development Constraints Land Use Concepts • Two Development Concepts Evaluated • Differences due to alternative concepts for Avienda site and alternative concept for remnant right-of-way at Pioneer Trail and 212. • Overall magnitude difference from 2005 AUAR — 250 to 400 fewer housing units — 500,000 to 600,000 more square feet of non- residential development — No High School within the project area. e �o OKey Takeaways . Over 600 medium and high density residential units between NE and SW quadrants . Around 1.3 million total square feet of commercial and office development • Over 830,000 square feet of business development • 460,500 square feet of retail development Mitigation of existing wetlands in NE quadrant to allow for Increased development potential 'NM.mMM mYM 0�� NM, �baJ�Y.lYM cwi ow,I.y,.M.MInM Concept A Avienda T Q I �w� I e,7-,f r © Key Takeaways Almost 400 new medium II and high denisty residential 1) units primarily in the NE quadrant r Around 1.3 million total square feet of commercial and office development • Over 1 million square feet of business development • 250,000 square feet of retail development Maintenance of existing wetlands in NE quadrant ' resulting in more passive open space b Y3 + r�„ t LYMAN BOULEVARD r Fy I moor 1 1 I .. iYM.NBOLREvnap Concert B Avienda o _1 n� Ea nananwm- Wetlands Wetland Inventory Scrub Shrub Hoodplaln Forest Seasonally Flooded Basin - Shallow Marsh - Wet Meadow - Wooded Swamp - Deep Marsh I (pen Water Note: Wetland data from regional and local data sources and an official wetland delineation on the Avienda site. Where wetlands are impacted, development must mitigate following federal, state, and local mitigation rules. �e k Surface Water Management • Maintain drainage patterns • Abstract first 1.1-inch of runoff from new impervious • Maintain discharge rates at or below current levels • Remove 60% phosphorous and 90% TSS • Pre -treat runoff prior to infiltration/filtration • Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) +rrr f I� r� �� o-asn usr�msm • —► uMioum nay IftleyMorn sum MM M � r Puw Sanitary Sewer and Water Service �ww e�w � swTM. r 5 d OR f• M SWITM. S1ER Kimley)»Horn o�O �� YMTMY gvrn swrnry raw C �\ i mm .-....... — E03IME YMfMY lEtll �TQIK IMIITM. Ztwl f0M2CTM CHAWASSEH 2005 AUAR UPDATE Kimley*Hom PROPOSED SAMTARY UTIUM YMI �/��yy Illprp� N11�YY1 CHAHH � 2MG AUAR :CAM val� unim Traff i c I" O O O Lyman Blvd 0 1 p�o�o 1 1 1 1 1 co / 1 / L r Sol l 9,200 • .4 Y ' O ziz 1 `O rn r .01 1 3 I Pioneer Trail 3,200 LEGEND_ • 6letlgbleflttlon SY lnrawn 1..1 UAilwloWAW ® AADTVW. 7 D.iy gas Toss 2% D,ty 4I65 aab 15% AM Peak AM Peak PM Peak owns trans PM Peak 6;"- ) a —,M 10 i� — — Lyman Blvd — — � r — — r — — ti 1 f 10 1 1 V—r L — —— � ` , A r — — • 1 ; 1 ,' I a' _ .i a _ .. o e r ► a Ploneerhatl 10% ' o i a 5% 4Opllo"A07:1 DaiyUnOwelWAw.AMP-k© SAeT .WMM . PMPakxx T.WSSeT,.M, fxwxlq Qw o(VD*--) EXISTING CONDITIONS Kimlpv>»Horn FUTURE YEAR (2022) Kimleyl) Horn PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES `/ TRIP GENERATION & DISTRIBUTION SUMMARY Traffic 0 i y � 18,620 -Lyman Blvd— 14,800 r / I J o 1 1 I o �00 J 1 v 6p0 • r T ' / 1 _• N e � Pioneer Trail N p 7 12 300 Q 1�100 _A • w•w • EdetFglnlenectlon Q Si Loc iun {-_1 Undeveloped km ® A DTVARM 770 0 u1 M S��+ 18,000 Lyman Blvd 14,300 00 _ — _ y r 1 1 0 1 I oo,-CD 1 .' 1 1 ,� 1 f� I � 12,000 '3 Kimle %HOrn FUTURE YEAR (2022) KimleyoHorn y PEAK HOUR TOTAL TRAFFIC VOLUMES - OPTION A v 2i I I Pioneer Trail 5.400 00 FUTURE YEAR (2022) PEAK HOUR TOTAL TRAFFIC VOLUMES - OPTION B Traff i c .l4 L r o- -i Kimleyv)Horn FUTURE INTERSECTION CONTROL b 1 LANE ASSIGNMENTS Next Steps • Open House —February 28 — 5:00 to 7:00 pm • PC Public Hearing March 7 • Finalize Draft of Full AUAR QVlft,(w co WO • Present full draft to City Council March 13 • Publish in EQB Monitor April 3 Por m� 'A -P CSC, • Address comments • City Council Consideration May 8 FSNNESp� � 9 A: OkOQuick Reference: Alternative Urban Areawide Review P AUAR Update Process Steps (Mimnesota Rules 4410.3610 Subpart 7) Minnesota Rules provide guidance on the circumstances that require an AUAR update. Regardless of any significant changes, the AUAR must be updated every five years until all of the development in the area has been approved An AUAR update is generally a taster process than starting a new AUAR since the update process does not require a complete revision of the AUAR document. Instead, the update process requires that the AUAR document, along with the mitigation plan, be updated to the extent necessary to reflect the changes that have occurred in the area included in the review. The updated documents are distributed in a manner similar to a final AUAR except that the documents must be sent to all parties listed on the EAW distribution list and a notice must be published in the EQB Monitor. The process for appeal to the EQB can still be invoked by state agencies and the Metropolitan Council as in the normal AUAR process. RGU completes a draft update of the AUAR and mitigation plan (4410.3610 Subp. 5 D-H & Subp. 7) RGU distributes AUAR draft and mitigation plan update for comments. Notice is published in the EQB Monitor (4410.3610 Subp. 5 D & Subp. 7) RGU adopts final AUAR and mitigation plan. Notice is published in the EQB Monitor (4410.3610 Subp. 5 E) Reviewers have 10 days from publication date in EQB Monitor to submit written comments to RGU. State Agencies and the Met Council have 10 days from receipt of final AUAR documents to file an objection (4410.3610 Subp.5 D) Negotiations between RGU and objecting agency (4410.3610 Subp. 5 F & G) 0 e m a EQB action required to determine adequacy of AUAR documents (4410.3610 Subp. 5 H) Updated December 2015 Page 3