Loading...
06-27-11 WSCOURT, MACARTHUR & RUPPE, ALLY Attorneys at law Michael C. Couri * 705 Central Avenue East Sarah E. Schwarzhoff Andrew J. MacArthur PO Box 369 Robert T. Ruppe** St. Michael, MN 55376-0369 (763) 497-1930 *Also Licensed in Illinois (763) 497-2599 (FAA9 **Also Licensed in California www.courimacarthur.com June 17, 2011 City Council Members City of Otsego C/o Tami Loff, City Clerk 8899 Nashua Avenue NE Otsego, MN 55330 RE: Upcoming Conversation with Potential Interim City Administrator Candidate Dear Council Members: We have scheduled a question and answer session with the former Elk River City Administrator on June 27, 2011. This is not an employer-employee interview at this time. However, due to the outside possibility that their may at some point be a contractual or employer-employee relationship between Ms. Johnson and the City, and due to the nature of the tasks that may be undertaken, I think that the Council should steer clear of questions that could lead to inappropriate responses. Such questions would be those which could be construed as touching upon matters which would not be acceptable in an ordinary employment interview situation. I am therefore asking the Council to avoid questions which could be construed as inquiries regarding marital status, age, race, color, creed, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, disability, or status with regard to public assistance. The above mentioned list of prohibited areas comes from the Minnesota Human Rights Act, Minn. Stat. 363.01 et seq. Since we are only having an informal conversation at this time I am asking that you not ask questions in these areas purely as a precautionary measure. Letter to Otsego City Council June 17, 2011 Page 2 Any reasonable question related to previous experience, qualifications for the position, or posing a hypothetical which is job related is fair game. I will be available to answer any questions you might have regarding this matter at the time of the scheduled workshop meeting. Very truly yours, Andrew J. MacArthur COURI, MACARTHUR & RUPPE, PLLP PRE-EMPLOYMENT INQUIRY GUIDE LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES HR Reference Manual — Hiring Chapter Note: This document is not meant to encompass all of the laws governing pre-employment inquiries. Police positions in particular are subject to different laws. Call your city, attorney or the League with questions. SUBJECT YOU CANNOT ASK YOU CAN ASK RACE/COLOR • What is your race? • Questions about criminal convictions if necessary and job • Have you ever been arrested? relatedness of crime is considered. CRIMINAL HISTORY • Have you ever been charged with a crime? • Remember - Past convictions are not absolute bar to • To what social organizations, clubs, societies do you employment. belong? • Questions regarding color of hair, eyes, etc. SEX • Questions regarding Ms., Mr., or Mrs. • Do you have any commitments or responsibilities that • I-Iavc you ever changed your name? might prevent you from meeting attendance requirements? MARITAL STATUS • What is your marital status? • Do you anticipate lengthy absences from work? • How many children do you have? • Other than your spouse, do you have any relatives working PREGNANCY OR • Are you pregnant? for the city? RELATED • Docs your spouse work for the city? CONDITIONS • Do you plan to have children? • Do you have daycare? • Questions asking who to contact in case of an emergency (until after hire). • Any pregnancy -related conditions? • What does your spouse do'? RELIGION What is your religious affiliation? Are you available to work on Saturdays or Sundays, if • What church do you go to? needed? • What is the name of your pastor, minister, or rabbi? • What religious holiday do you observe? AGE What is your age / date of birth? • If hired, can you provide proof that you are 18 years of • When did you graduate from high school? age? • Can you provide proof of your age? • About military service on the Veteran's Preference • Dates of military service? application form. • How old are your children? HANDICAPS • Are you handicapped? •Pre -job offer medical inquiries are prohibited. • Do you have any disability conditions? • Can you perform the essential functions of the DISABILITY What is your workers compensation history? position, with or without accommodation? • What is your general health condition? • Have you ever been tested for AIDS? • Have you received disability insurance? _ • Do you smoke? • Are you under a doctor's care? SEXUAL How are you related to your roommate? • NONE ORIENTATION (lave you ever been tested for AIDS? CITIZENSHIP Of what country are you a citizen? • Are you authorized to work in the U.S.? • When did you become a U.S. citizen? • After employment, can you submit proof of U.S. • Do you intend to become a U.S. citizen? citizenship? Potential Questions: What is your perception of the purpose of City government? ■ What are services that Otsego doesn't provide that it should or services that should be expanded? 2. Describe how you define of the role of the City Administrator: ■ Interaction with the City Council. ■ Interaction with City staff. ■ Contacts with residents, businesses, community organizations. ■ Relationships with adjacent cities/townships, County, school districts. • Role in meetings (including staff meetings, advisory commissions, City Council) ■ As a go-between for the City Council and City staff. ■ Should the City Council establish professional contacts directly with individual City staff? 3. Based on your experience as a City Administrator and Finance Director should Otsego continue to go forward with its contractual relationships for services with adjacent communities or move to develop as a more freestanding city? 4. Given your familiarity with Otsego, what are the primary goals or projects for the City Council to be working on? 5. Describe a program or project you have been responsible for developing and implementing. ■ How was the scope of the project defined? ■ What were the long and short term goals? ■ What unanticipated issues arose and how were they addressed? 6. What do you see as the primary challenges facing Otsego at this time? 7. What is your experience with economic development? ■ What would you see as programs or tools Otsego should implement? 8. Describe your experience with human resources: ■ Job descriptions, hiring and termination. ■ Salary and benefits. ■ Staff management and evaluation. 9. Identify a situation that demonstrates your ability to handle public controversy. ■ Describe the last time you "put your foot in your mouth" and how you handled the situation. 10. What is your approach to a negotiation and describe a situation where these skills proved effective. ITEM 2 Version 8/08rev ENVIRONMENTALAsSESSMENT WORKSHEET Note to preparers: This form and EAW Guidelines are available at the Environmental Quality Board's website at: htta://www.egb.state.mn.us/EnvRevGuidanceDocuments.htm. The Environmental Assessment Worksheet provides information about a project that may have the potential for significant environmental effects. The EAW is prepared by the Responsible Governmental Unit or its agents to determine whether an Environmental Impact Statement should be prepared. The project proposer must supply any reasonably accessible data for — but should not complete — the final worksheet. The complete question as well as the answer must be included if the EAW is prepared electronically. Note to reviewers: Comments must be submitted to the RGU during the 30 -day comment period following notice of the EAW in the EQB Monitor. Comments should address the accuracy and completeness of information, potential impacts that warrant further investigation and the need for an EIS. 1. Project title 85a' Street Extension 2. Proposer Contact person: Ronald J. Wagner Title: City Engineer Address: 3601 Thurston Avenue City, state, ZIP: Anoka, MN 55303 Phone: 763-427-5860 Fax: 763-427-0520 E-mail: ronj@haa-inc.com 4. Reason for EAW preparation (check one) RGU Contact person: D. Daniel Licht., AICP Title: City Planner/Zoning Administrator Address: 8899 Nashua Avenue NE City, state, ZIP: Otsego, MN 55330 Phone: 763-441-4414 Fax: 763-441-8823 E-mail: ddl@planningco.com _EIS scoping X Mandatory EAW _Citizen petition _ RGU discretion _Proposer volunteered If EAW or EIS is mandatory give EQB rule category subpart number and subpart name: 4410.43 Subpart 22 – Highway Project 5. Project location County City/Township N 1/2 SE '/4 S19 Township 121 Range 23 S 'h NE '/4 S 19 Township 121 Range 23 N '/z SW '/< S20 Township 121 Range 23 S '/z NW '/4 S20 Township 121 Range 23 GPS Coordinates Tax Parcel Number 10 W Attach each of the following to the EAW: • County map showing the general location of the project; • U.S. Geological Survey 7.5 minute, 1:24,000 scale map indicating project boundaries (photocopy acceptable); • Site plan showing all significant project and natural features. 6. Description a. Provide a project summary of 50 words or less to be published in the EQB Monitor. The City of Otsego is proposing to construct 85`i' Street from Nashua Avenue to Mason Avenue. This one mile long collector street is a new municipal state aid roadway and is included in the City of Otsego 2011 Transportation Plan. b. Give a complete description of the proposed project and related new construction. Attach additional sheets as necessary. Emphasize construction, operation methods and features that will cause physical manipulation of the environment or will produce wastes. Include modifications to existing equipment or industrial processes and significant demolition, removal or remodeling of existing structures. Indicate the timing and duration of construction activities. Background The City of Otsego has developed an overall Transportation Plan which includes this roadway segment as part of an overall east west collector system. The complete 85"' Street collector roadway will connect to County State Aid Highway 42 and County State Aid Highway 19. Proposed Project This one mile long segment of new roadway is designed as parkway, which includes a 16 -foot grass median, two 12 -foot driving lanes and two 6 -foot shoulders. The entire roadway is an urban section with curb and gutter, a 5 -foot sidewalk north of the roadway and a 10 -foot bike path south of the roadway. This is an extension of the existing 85'J1 Street, which begins at the intersection of Nashua Avenue and ends at the intersection of Mason Avenue. The proposed roadway alignment has been selected to minimize impacts to wetlands and to minimize grading and earthmoving operations because of the rolling terrain. Construction of 85"' Street will require purchasing a 100 -foot wide right-of-way corridor along with temporary slope easements in various locations. The total right-of-way to be purchased is 13.46 acres and 1.63 acres of temporary easement. Construction methods will include the use of heavy equipment for earthwork, storm sewer installation, aggregate base and paving operations. Improvements will be accomplished using typical construction practices and materials, under the supervision of the City Engineer. Dewatering of groundwater for construction may be necessary at the easterly end of the project where there are wetland impacts. Grading of the roadway will not result in a large excess or deficit of dirt. Roadway base and paving materials will be imported to the site from local pits. Concrete materials and bituminous pavement will ultimately be brought to the site from existing suppliers. Stormwater generated from the 85"' Street project will be conveyed by storm sewer to proposed storage and sedimentation basins prior to release into natural water bodies. The proposed basins will provide rate control and water quality benefit. Construction access to the project will be provided by Nashua Avenue at the east end and Mason Avenue at the west end. Erosion control measures will be provided as required by the City of Otsego Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency requirements. Erosion Control Measures may include silt fence, rock entrances, catch basin protection, erosion control blanket, seeding and mulch. c. Explain the project purpose; if the project will be carried out by a governmental unit, explain the need for the project and identify its beneficiaries. The purpose of this project is to provide an east -west corridor through the City of Otsego, which will ultimately link County State Aid Highway 42 and County State Aid Highway 19. The beneficiaries of the project are the current and future landowners in the City of Otsego, the property owners will be enabled to develop along with property owners who will benefit from reduced traffic on surrounding roadways. d. Are future stages of this development including development on any other property planned or likely to happen? X Yes No If yes, briefly describe future stages, relationship to present project, timeline and plans for environmental review. The project may be completed in phases with initial construction of rural section, two lane MSA roadway. Subsequent expansion of the roadway to the planned parkway section would occur as traffic volume increases and funding is available. 850' Street is planned to extend westerly for an additional 2.5 miles in the future. Environmental reviews will be conducted on future projects as required. e. Is this project a subsequent stage of an earlier project? _Yes X No If yes, briefly describe the past development, timeline and any past environmental review. 7. Project magnitude data Total project acreage 15.09 Number of residential units: unattached 0 attached 0 maximum units per building Commercial, industrial or institutional building area (gross floor space): total square feet 0 Indicate areas of specific uses (in square feet): Office 0 Manufacturing 0 Retail 0 Other industrial 0 Warehouse 0 Institutional 0 Light industrial 0 Agricultural 0 Other commercial (specify) 0 Building height If over 2 stories, compare to heights of nearby buildings 8. Permits and approvals required. List all known local, state and federal permits, approvals and financial assistance for the project. Include modifications of any existing permits, governmental review of plans and all direct and indirect forms of public financial assistance including bond guarantees, Tax Increment Financing and infrastructure. All of these final decisions are prohibited until all appropriate environmental review has been completed. See Minnesota Rules, Chapter 4410.3100. Unit of government Type of application Status MPCA National Pollution Discharge To Be Obtained Elimination System (NPDES) - General Stormwater Construction Permit City of Otsego Wetland Conservation Act Permit To Be Obtained Mn/DOT State Aid Plan Review To Be Obtained Mn/DOT State Aid Funding To Be Obtained Mn/DNR Public Waters Permit To Be Obtained Corps of Engineers Clean Water 404 Permit To Be Obtained 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. The area adjacent to the project is rural in character with agricultural fields and scattered rural residential housing sites. The character of the area will not change until such time as sanitary sewer and water utilities are extended to allow for urban development of low density residential uses as guided by the City's Comprehensive Plan. Wetlands will be impacted on the easterly end of the project at the intersection with Nashua Avenue, along with other isolated wetlands. No other environmental hazards are anticipated to be encountered as part of the project. 10. Cover types. Estimate the acreage of the site with each of the following cover types before and after development: Before After Types 1-8 wetlands 2.55 1.35 Lawn/landscaping Wooded/forest 0 0 Impervious surfaces Brush/Grassland .85 .34 Stormwater Pond Cropland 10.59 0.95 Other (describe) Before After 1.1 4.55 7.10 0.8 TOTAL 15.09 15.09 If Before and After totals are not equal, explain why: 11. Fish, wildlife and ecologically sensitive resources a. Identify fish and wildlife resources and habitats on or near the site and describe how they would be affected by the project. Describe any measures to be taken to minimize or avoid impacts. Information regarding rare plant or animal species has been requested form the DNR Natural Heritage and Non -game Research Program. b. Are any state -listed (endangered, threatened or special concern) species, rare plant communities or other sensitive ecological resources on or near the site? _Yes _No If yes, describe the resource and how it would be affected by the project. Describe any measures that will be taken to minimize or avoid adverse impacts. Provide the license agreement number (LA-__) and/or Division of Ecological Resources contact number (ERDB ) from which the data were obtained and attach the response letter from the DNR Division of Ecological Resources . Indicate if any additional survey work has been conducted within the site and describe the results. 12. Physical impacts on water resources. Will the project involve the physical or hydrologic alteration — dredging, filling, stream diversion, outfall structure, diking, and impoundment — of any surface waters such as a lake, pond, wetland, stream or drainage ditch? X Yes _No If yes, identify water resource affected and give the DNR Public Waters Inventory number(s) if the water resources affected are on the PWI: Describe alternatives considered and proposed mitigation measures to minimize impacts. See section 31 for alternatives considered. The wetlands on the east side of the project are designated as natural environment lakes – placement of streets within the Shoreland Overlay District is subject to Section 20-92-1 IT of the Zoning Ordinance. Wetland impacts will be mitigated by purchasing wetland bank credits, which will be reviewed and approved by the Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP). The TEP includes the City of Otsego, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and Army Corps of Engineers. 13. Water use. Will the project involve installation or abandonment of any water wells, connection to or changes in any public water supply or appropriation of any ground or surface water (including dewatering)? X Yes No If yes, as applicable, give location and purpose of any new wells; public supply affected, changes to be made, and water quantities to be used; the source, duration, quantity and purpose of any appropriations; and unique well numbers and DNR appropriation permit numbers, if known. Identify any existing and new wells on the site map. If there are no wells known on site, explain methodology used to determine. Dewatering of groundwater may be necessary for roadway construction. No long term groundwater impact is expected. Dewatering of groundwater may necessary during construction, particularly the east end of the site. Dewatering will be directed to sedimentation ponds before it is released to wetlands. Adjacent homes have individual wells and are not expected to be affected by the project. 14. Water -related land use management district. Does any part of the project involve a shoreland zoning district, a delineated 100 -year flood plain, or a state or federally designated wild or scenic river land use district? _Yes X No If yes, identify the district and discuss project compatibility with district land use restrictions. 15. Water surface use. Will the project change the number or type of watercraft on any water body? _Yes X No If yes, indicate the current and projected watercraft usage and discuss any potential overcrowding or conflicts with other uses. 16. Erosion and sedimentation. Give the acreage to be graded or excavated and the cubic yards of soil to be moved: 15.0 acres; 80,000 cubic yards. Describe any steep slopes or highly erodible soils and identify them on the site map. Describe any erosion and sedimentation control measures to be used during and after project construction. This project will disturb 15 acres of land. The majority of the property is agricultural fields. This project will require a NPDES General Stormwater Permit for construction activity since the project will disturb more than one acre of land. This permit will require temporary and permanent erosion and sediment control measures to reduce and eliminate erosion and keep sediments on-site during and after construction. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will also be required. The SWPPP will address erosion and sediment control within the project site prior to construction until final stabilization or turf is established on the site. 17. Water quality: surface water runoff a. Compare the quantity and quality of site runoff before and after the project. Describe permanent controls to manage or treat runoff. Describe any stormwater pollution prevention plans. Stormwater from 85`x' Street will be collected by curb and gutter to storm sewer. The storm sewer will outlet to treatment/detention basins prior to discharging to wetlands. b. Identify routes and receiving water bodies for runoff from the site; include major downstream water bodies as well as the immediate receiving waters. Estimate impact runoff on the quality of receiving waters. Stormwater and surface water generally travels west to east in this area, ultimately making its way to the Crow River and the Mississippi River. 18. Water quality: wastewaters a. Describe sources, composition and quantities of all sanitary, municipal and industrial wastewater produced or treated at the site. None b. Describe waste treatment methods or pollution prevention efforts and give estimates of composition after treatment. Identify receiving waters, including major downstream water bodies (identifying any impaired waters), and estimate the discharge impact on the quality of receiving waters. If the project involves on-site sewage systems, discuss the suitability of site conditions for such systems. None c. If wastes will be discharged into a publicly owned treatment facility, identify the facility, describe any pretreatment provisions and discuss the facility's ability to handle the volume and composition of wastes, identifying any improvements necessary. None 19. Geologic hazards and soil conditions a. Approximate depth (in feet) to ground water: minimum 0" average; 30" to bedrock: N/A minimum average. Describe any of the following geologic site hazards to ground water and also identify them on the site map: sinkholes, shallow limestone formations or karst conditions. Describe measures to avoid or minimize environmental problems due to any of these hazards. None b. Describe the soils on the site, giving NRCS (SCS) classifications, if known. Discuss soil texture and potential for groundwater contamination from wastes or chemicals spread or spilled onto the soils. Discuss any mitigation measures to prevent such contamination. Soil types: Cordova loam, Angus loam, Lester loam and Angus -Cordova complex. Groundwater contamination is not anticipated to be an issue. 20. Solid wastes, hazardous wastes, storage tanks a. Describe types, amounts and compositions of solid or hazardous wastes, including solid animal manure, sludge and ash, produced during construction and operation. Identify method and location of disposal. For projects generating municipal solid waste, indicate if there is a source separation plan; describe how the project will be modified for recycling. If hazardous waste is generated, indicate if there is a hazardous waste minimization plan and routine hazardous waste reduction assessments. Municipal household waste will be produced during construction, which will be collected by licensed haulers and deposited at a permitted facility. b. Identify any toxic or hazardous materials to be used or present at the site and identify measures to be used to prevent them from contaminating groundwater. If the use of toxic or hazardous materials will lead to a regulated waste, discharge or emission, discuss any alternatives considered to minimize or eliminate the waste, discharge or emission. Construction machinery will be on site for all phases of this project. Equipment will be maintained by the Contractor, along with fueling operations and cleaning up any spills that may occur. c. Indicate the number, location, size and use of any above or below ground tanks to store petroleum products or other materials, except water. Describe any emergency response containment plans. No permanent storage tanks will be part of this project. 21. Traffic. Parking spaces added: 0 Existing spaces (if project involves expansion): 0 Estimated total average daily traffic generated: 0 Estimated maximum peak hour traffic generated and time of occurrence: 0 Indicate source of trip generation rates used in the estimates. If the peak hour traffic generated exceeds 250 vehicles or the total daily trips exceeds 2,500, a traffic impact study must be prepared as part of the EA W. Using the format and procedures described in the Minnesota Department of Transportation's Traffic Impact Study Guidance (available at: ho://www.oim.dot.state.mn.us/access/pdfs/Chapter%205.pdf) or a similar local guidance, provide an estimate of the impact on traffic congestion on affected roads and describe any traffic improvements necessary. The analysis must discuss the project's impact on the regional transportation system. Traffic Construction of 85d' Street will not generate new traffic, except during construction, however it will cause a redistribution of existing traffic. Exiting traffic within this area is currently using Mason Avenue and Nashua Avenue to travel north and south. The nearest east and west roadway is 83`d Street which is '/4 mile to the south and has a gravel surface. Minimal traffic information is available in this area; however Mn/DOT has indicated that 85`x' Street has 1,050 vehicles per day (vpd) east of the project location. Nashua Avenue has 840 vpd north of 85d' Street and 160 vpd south of 856' Street. Traffic congestion is not an issue with adjacent roadways. During construction, construction traffic will use local roads. Materials will be delivered to the site by the most efficient route chosen by the Contractor. Future traffic in the project area will likely increase with residential and commercial development. The local School District has discussed locating a high school in the area of this project; however that is in the planning stages and depends on student numbers within the City of Otsego and the surrounding areas. 22. Vehicle -related air emissions. Estimate the effect of the project's traffic generation on air quality, including carbon monoxide levels. Discuss the effect of traffic improvements or other mitigation measures on air quality impacts. Vehicle emissions associated with the project will not have a significant effect on air quality. Residential and other development enabled by the construction of 85`h Street may result in measurable but not significant impacts. 23. Stationary source air emissions. Describe the type, sources, quantities and compositions of any emissions from stationary sources of air emissions such as boilers, exhaust stacks or fugitive dust sources. Include any hazardous air pollutants (consult EAW Guidelines for a listing) and any greenhouse gases (such as carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide) and ozone-depleting chemicals (chloro -fluorocarbons, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons or sulfur hexafluoride). Also describe any proposed pollution prevention techniques and proposed air pollution control devices. Describe the impacts on air quality. The project will not generate stationary source air emissions. 24. Odors, noise and dust. Will the project generate odors, noise or dust during construction or during operation? X Yes _No If yes, describe sources, characteristics, duration, quantities or intensity and any proposed measures to mitigate adverse impacts. Also identify locations of nearby sensitive receptors and estimate impacts on them. Discuss potential impacts on human health or quality of life. (Note: fugitive dust generated by operations may be discussed at item 23 instead of here.) Construction noise and dust will be controlled by hours of operations and watering requirements imposed as part of the City Engineering Manual. Enforcement of these regulations will be provided by an on site construction observer. Construction of this project is not anticipated to involve any process or materials that would generate any odors. 25. Nearby resources. Are any of the following resources on or in proximity to the site? Archaeological, historical or architectural resources? _Yes X No Prime or unique farmlands or land within an agricultural preserve? _Yes X No Designated parks, recreation areas or trails? _Yes X No Scenic views and vistas? _Yes X No Other unique resources? _Yes X No If yes, describe the resource and identify any project -related impacts on the resource. Describe any measures to minimize or avoid adverse impacts. 26. Visual impacts. Will the project create adverse visual impacts during construction or operation? Such as glare from intense lights, lights visible in wilderness areas and large visible plumes from cooling towers or exhaust stacks? _Yes X No If yes, explain. 27. Compatibility with plans and land use regulations. Is the project subject to an adopted local comprehensive plan, land use plan or regulation, or other applicable land use, water, or resource management plan of a local, regional, state or federal agency? X Yes — No. If yes, describe the plan, discuss its compatibility with the project and explain how any conflicts will be resolved. If no, explain. The City of Otsego has adopted a Comprehensive Plan that includes land use plan and a transportation plan which includes 85"' Street between Mason Avenue and Nashua Avenue as a parkway collector street. This street will serve as a primary east -west connection across the City providing access between neighborhoods, local business areas as well as connections to regional arterial roadways for travel to/from communities beyond Otsego. 28. Impact on infrastructure and public services. Will new or expanded utilities, roads, other infrastructure or public services be required to serve the project? _Yes X No. If yes, describe the new or additional infrastructure or services needed. (Note: any infrastructure that is a connected action with respect to the project must be assessed in the EAW; see EAW Guidelines for details.) The 85"' Street project is considered a public project. This project will not require any other projects or utilities to be constructed. 85"' Street may be extended to the west in the future, as indicated on the 2011 Transportation Plan for the City of Otsego. Water and sewer utilities are not included in this project. This area of Otsego is rural in character with agricultural fields and scattered rural residential housing sites with individual wells and septic systems. The character of the area will not change until such time as sanitary sewer and water are extended to allow for urban development, as guided by the City's Comprehensive Plan.. 29. Cumulative potential effects. Minnesota Rule part 4410.1700, subpart 7, item B requires that the RGU consider the "cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects" when determining the need for an environmental impact statement. Identify any past, present or reasonably foreseeable future projects that may interact with the project described in this EAW in such a way as to cause cumulative potential effects. (Such future projects would be those that are actually planned or for which a basis of expectation has been laid.) Describe the nature of the cumulative potential effects and summarize any other available information relevant to determining whether there is potential for significant environmental effects due to these cumulative effects (or discuss each cumulative potential effect under appropriate item (s) elsewhere on this form). The construction of 85`" Street is included in the City of Otsego 2011 Transportation Plan as a parkway. Mn/DOT will designate this roadway as a rural collector. The purpose of this new roadway alignment is to provide a more efficient east -west route through the center of the City of Otsego. Providing an east -west corridor through the center of Otsego will promote commercial and residential development along with improving efficiency for the traveling public. Current traffic is required to travel north to County Road 39 or south to County Road 37, unless the driver chooses to take local roads, some of which are gravel surfaced and receive a lower level of maintenance. 85t' Street is proposed to extend to the west another 2.5 miles where it will connect with Kadler Avenue and continue onto another existing segment of 85`1' Street. Environmental reviews will be conducted when required on the future segments of 85t1i Street prior to construction. Full development of the planned urbanized areas of the City of Otsego as guided by the City's Comprehensive Plan will result in the permanent displacement of some wildlife habitat. Surrounding rural property and wetland areas will continue to exist as sanctuary. Full development should not result in traffic congestion due to proactive planning measures on behalf of the City and County. Air quality issues should not arise from this roadway construction. Water quality issues will be addressed by the use of sedimentation and detention ponds to ensure proper discharge at existing rates. 30. Other potential environmental impacts. If the project may cause any adverse environmental impacts not addressed by items 1 to 28, identify and discuss them here, along with any proposed mitigation. 31. Summary of issues. Do not complete this section if the EAW is being done for EIS scoping; instead, address relevant issues in the draft Scoping Decision document, which must accompany the EA W. List any impacts and issues identified above that may require further investigation before the project is begun. Discuss any alternatives or mitigative measures that have been or may be considered for these impacts and issues, including those that have been or may be ordered as permit conditions. Three roadway alignments alternatives were considered during the development of this project, which are attached at the end of this document. A number of factors and impacts were considered as the project progressed, such as: • Length of new roadway alignment. • Right-of-way needed. • Wetland impacts. • Quantity of earthwork. • Number of homes to purchase and remove. • Number of homes impacted by roadway location. • Length of existing roadway to reconstruct. • Length of roadway to demolish. Alternative #1 The preferred alternative for the extension of 8501 Street is a direct east -west route beginning at the existing intersection of 85'11 Street and Nashua Avenue and ending at Mason Avenue. This route requires the least amount of right-of-way and has the least impact on the surrounding homes. The alignment will have an estimated wetland impact of 1.2 acres, however this alternative includes the removal of approximately 1,250 lineal feet of 83`d Street. By removing this portion of roadway, particularly through the DNR wetland, approximately 0.46 acres of wetland can be restored. Restoration of this DNR wetland will join together two larger wetlands that were historically connected making it better habitat for wild life and the flow of water from south to north. 83`d Avenue will be disconnected from Nashua Avenue and a cul-de-sac will be constructed west of the DNR wetland. A future connection to 85"' Street is shown, which will rely on future development patterns. A meeting was held with the Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP) which included the City Wetland Official, the NW/DNR, Board of Water and Soil Resources and the Army Corps of Engineers. The TEP preferred this alternative because of the minimization of wetland impacts, the wetland restoration and the historical connection of the two wetlands. Three existing homes will be impacted by the proximity of the proposed roadway. Relocation will not be required for any existing homes along the project. A summary of Alternative #I includes: Length of New Roadway Alignment 5,300 LF Right-of-way Required 13.46 Acres Wetland Impacts 1.20 Acres Wetland Restoration 0.46 Acres Number of Homes Impacted by Location 3 Homes Existing Roadway Demolition 1,300 LF Alternative #2 This roadway alignment begins approximately 2,000 feet east of Nashua Avenue. The easterly portion of 85`s Street is routed north of wetlands and two existin� homes. This alternative has less wetland impacts, however it does not include the removal of 83` Street through the wetland. A small wetland east of Nashua Avenue is also impacted along with three additional homes. This alternative requires significantly more grading because of the rolling terrain and steep grades. five homes would be affected by the location of the roadway and three of the homes will require constructing new driveways because of elevation issues with 85`" Street. None of the existing homes will need to be relocated. 800 LF of existing roadway will be removed for the relocated intersection with Nashua Avenue. The 83`d Avenue Roadway removal, and associated wetland restoration is not included because it is necessary to keep the connection to Nashua Avenue. The future connection of 83`d Street to 85fl' Street is not practical with this alternative because of existing wetlands. A summary of Alternative 2 includes: Length of New Roadway Alignment 7,300 LF Right-of-way Required 17.20 Acres Wetland Impacts 0.92 Acres Number of Homes Affected by Location 5 Homes Existing Roadway Demolition 800 LF Existing Roadway to Reconstruct 1,200 LF Alternative # 3 This roadway alignment is an improvement of 83`d rather than extending 85"' Street. The existing 85`h Street would be connected to 83`d Street with a reverse curve. 3,520 LF of Nashua Avenue will need to be realigned to provide an appropriate intersection. 83`d Street will be improved to a parkway, which will require additional right-of-way. There are a number of homes which would be significantly impacted by the new alignment. One home at the corner of 85h Street and Nashua Avenue will need to be removed for construction. Four existing homes will be significantly closer to the proposed right-of-way, which may need to be relocated because of setback requirements. The existing topography will require large grading operations with large cuts and fills to achieve the necessary design speed. This alternative requires construction of significantly more roadway, along with impacting more homes. A summary of Alternative 3 includes: Length of New Roadway Alignment 5,700 LF Right-of-way Required 14.1 Acres Wetland Impacts 2.1 Acres Number of Homes to Remove 1 Home Number of Homes Affected by Location 6 Homes Existing Roadway Demolition 4,500 LF Existing Roadway to Reconstruct 6,900 LF RGU CERTIFICATION. (The Environmental Quality Board will only accept SIGNED Environmental Assessment Worksheets for public notice in the EQB Monitor.) I hereby certify that: • The information contained in this document is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge. • The EAW describes the complete project; there are no other projects, stages or components other than those described in this document, which are related to the project as connected actions or phased actions, as defined at Minnesota Rules, parts 4410.0200, subparts 9b and 60, respectively. • Copies of this EAW are being sent to the entire EQB distribution list. Signature Date D. Daniel Licht, AICP City Planning/Zoning Administrator Environmental Assessment Worksheet was prepared by the staff of the Environmental Quality Board at the Minnesota Department of Administration, Office of Geographic and Demographic Analysis. For additional information, worksheets or for EAW Guidelines, contact: Environmental Quality Board, 658 Cedar St., St. Paul, MN 55155, 651-201-2492, or http://www.egb.state.nm.us _.C�nty I I I I I right Cour. I I I I r ,r I I1—_I 1 r-, Sherburne County I I PR r1� IATlO_6" — — I Al � � I i rr r7 I I ' - I I I m I I �� I t C 'T�I� i y1 t r L3 y ( I I w McLeod County Carver County g'�Hakanson I I x „'Anderson— — —I- — — — — — — — ------ 'IL j I I I I I O Hennepin County I p,J a -r I a�iSEGQ N 85TH STREET NE ON THE GREAT RIVER ROAD A L O CATION MAP ATA SOURCESWRIGHT COUNTY SURVEY DEPT.. MN DNR 8 CITY OF OTSEGO 1946 Ev aOiSEGQ USGS ON THE GREAT RIVER ROAD LOCATION MAP I K RANGE 24 RANGE 23 O 1 J9 42 a� 39 -- . . U 42 19 37 iFRI F1- - i 3 - - - I I • I ` I 4 rt lmllmlR A 0MRA1IM 0I N01W110Y p ._.. .._.._.. �.. _.. _.._.. _.._.. _.._.._.• 6FIM6 • • EQS j Ago mm� mrn oncm tort RANGE 24 RANGE 23 � i � AMMUMME& AID CITY OF (/��\ 0 / SE �/ O ON THE GREAT RIVER ROAD TRANSPORTATION PLAN - 2011 ADOPTED BY RESOLUTION 2011-06 ON 14 FEBRUARY 2011 FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION mousmw/c IMOCMI MAJDt COlLWM t ManimA/cumEmm M CMIEC1OR M=2 MnMIAL PO WAY Mw PAL AtI t DEVMAL MN02 Cd11ECIW ■URDEW AL MMMlt COUL" IllHakanson Anderson 42 1 ry t2 ° o0 i o 00 0p aa° o0 0 0 0 0 0l 00 C4 I J.- o 0 o , B 1 00 J° - '3AB vnHSVN - - � F - - - - ❑ � 1 � 0 1 1 0 o C i= o• o 0 O o Q 00 ° I C� 77rm 0 oo 0 0 0 0 o ° 000 C fj �Wi7 WW IS N K= d O ° La I 1 I V D J ° V / I / 1 ILL,:3 8 O 0 0 000 0 on I 1 1� w I, II ° w o� F - w w 103 WV 9£li£:9 ll0Z/£l/9 8MP'1V1N3WNONIAN3 49£10\BMP\48£10\lVdI01Nnv4\S103fOSd\Bui Poo\:)I o 0LU a: >_ I i l Go Q% Gibe 15 1 1 7 � 0 0 ° tS I 1 1 = I F O ' a 1—� L.r0 I g r s - - - - - - & • 3" NOSY" 00 00�o 1 0 c 1 °° ° ° o C o 103 WV 9£li£:9 ll0Z/£l/9 8MP'1V1N3WNONIAN3 49£10\BMP\48£10\lVdI01Nnv4\S103fOSd\Bui Poo\:)I K:\cod_*ng\YKUJtGI5\MUNICIPAL\01364\dwg\01364 LNVIKUNMLNIAL.dwg 6/13/ZU11 6:34:39 AM GUI 1 � 1 o ° _ — — — — — MASON AVE — — 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 �tp 1 a } M-YP I 1 11 1 1 I CD 1 1 I C • ° mm m 11 1 I 1 ° IIm 11 z ° I 1 1 co II 1 1 o a of I I Z1 1!■p .. ml I 1 1 i pr—j \ \ ------ - ° ° ° ° 1 II° 6 ° 11 a 00 ° 0 coo —� NASHUA AVE. .c° vw ° I° 1t� i .__.. r..•.... lse. -m-, 1, %�� It' 9mi'l • � � �> >r ..r err ,� � �' ■ lb _ PROPERTY AFFECTED BY NEW ALIGNMENT ROADWAY DEMOLITION ® RELOCATION REQUIRED 85TH STREET EXTENSION ALTERNATIVE #3 I3 I .a I 1 I 1 Lo ° I e o�B ° ° °$e o000 1 ° o ° o °$ rill° 5 0 / o ° o © ° 1 1 I -------------- e t ° 'I Mft °o ' ° I 1 / jnj I � o I ' I el1p- B o I � 80 ° o ' ° Hakanson x' Z °°° Anderson OT384