ITEM 4.1 85th Street EAWip
`
Otsezo
MINNESOTA V
DEPARTMENT INFORMATION
Request for
City Council Action
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
REQUESTOR:
MEETING DATE:
Planning
City Planner Licht
26 June 2017
PRESENTER(s)
REVIEWED BY:
ITEM #:
City Planner Licht
City Administrator Flaherty
City Engineer Wagner
4.1-85 th Street EAW
AGENDA ITEM DETAILS
RECOMMENDATION:
City staff recommends the City Council adopt a Negative Declaration that the 85th Street and MacIver
Avenue project does not have potential for significant environmental effects and preparation of an
Environmental Impact Statement is not required.
ARE YOU SEEKING APPROVAL OF A CONTRACT?
IS A PUBLIC HEARING REQUIRED?
No
No
BACKGROUND/JUSTIFICATION:
The City is proposing to construct 85th Street, from Nashua Avenue to one-half mile west of Mason Avenue,
and MacIver Avenue from 85th Street for one-half mile south to 80th Street. This two mile long collector
street is a new Municipal State Aid (MSA) roadway. The purpose of this project is to provide an east -west
collector street corridor through the City, consistent with the City's 2012 Transportation Plan. Abutting
property owners will be enabled to develop along the route, local residents will benefit from reduced
traffic on surrounding local roadways, and commuters will benefit from a safer and more direct route
across the City and to the new ISD 728 E-8 School.
City staff has prepared an EAW for the project as required by Minnesota Rules 4410.43, Subp. 22 for a
collector street project more than one -mile in length. The EAW is used as a guide in reviewing required
approvals for a project and coordinating the responsibilities of other of governmental units to avoid or
minimize adverse environmental effects and to restore and enhance environmental quality. An EAW is not
to be used to justify a project, nor do potential negative environmental effects necessarily require that a
project be disapproved; the EAW process is not a build/no-build decision point.
EAWs are distributed to government agencies and published by the Minnesota Environmental Quality
Board (EQB) for a required 30 -day comment period. The EAW is also available on the City's website. The
comment period for the EAW ended on 14 June 2017. The City received comments from the DNR, MPCA,
and US Army Corps of Engineers. There are no comment of significance beyond obtaining required permits
and approvals, which are outlined in Paragraph 8 of the EAW.
The City Council held a public hearing on 8 May 2017 to receive public comment regarding the EAW.
Minnesota Rules does not require the City to hold a public hearing regarding the EAW; the City may do so if
it believes such meeting is useful in gathering input. The City has voluntarily scheduled a public hearing to
consider the EAW to coincide with the 30 -day comment period. Comments made at the public hearing are
to address the accuracy and completeness of the material contained in the EAW and potential impacts that
may warrant further investigation before the project is commenced. Comments made during the public
hearing that were related to potential environmental effects were limited to questions regarding wetland
impacts. As described in the EAW, the proposed design and alignment of the roadway avoids wetland
impacts to the extent possible while complying with engineering design requirements, specifically
requirements for MSA roadways. Wetlands that are impacted will be mitigated as described by Paragraph
11.b.iv.a of the EAW.
The decision on whether a project has potential for significant environmental effects is to be based upon
the criteria established by Minnesota Rule 4410.1700, Subp. 7. The conclusion of the EAW is that the
project does not have potential for significant environmental effects and that preparation of an EIS is not
required for further evaluation. None of the comments received during the 30 day comment period or at
the public hearing alter this conclusion. As such, City staff has drafted for City Council consideration a
negative declaration that the 85th Street/MacIver Avenue project does not have potential for significant
environmental requests and preparation of an EIS is not to be required.
I SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS ATTACHED: I
• Minutes of the Public Hearing of May 8, 2017
• DNR letter dated June 13, 2017
• MPCA letter dated June 13, 2017
• Army Corps of Engineers letter dated June 13, 2017
• Findings of Fact and Negative Declaration
POSSIBLE MOTION
PLEASE WORD MOTION AS YOU WOULD LIKE IT TO APPEAR IN THE MINUTES:
Motion to adopt Findings of Fact and Negative Declaration that the 85th Street & MacIver Avenue
Extension project does not have potential for significant environmental requests and preparation of an
Environmental Impact Statement is not to be required.
BUDGET INFORMATION
FUNDING: BUDGETED:
MSA Fund Yes
OTSEGO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
OTSEGO PRAIRIE CENTER
MAY 8, 2017
7:00 PM
Mayor Stockkp called the meeting to order at 7:03 PM.
Roll Call:
Mayor Jessica Stoc mp; Councilmembers: Vern Heidner, Jason Warehime and Corey Tanner.
Absent: Councilmem r Tom Darkenwald, Staff: Adam Flaherty, City Administrator/Finance Director;
Daniel Licht, City Plann Ron Wagner, City Engineer; Andy MacArthur, City Attorney; and Tami Loff,
City Clerk.
Pledge of Allegiance: Mayor-Nckamp led in the Pledge of Allegiance.
1. Open Forum.
Special Presentation: Certificates \oDoreciation presented to the Bov Scouts for their help with the
Otsego Egg Hunt Event.
The City Council and Park & Recreation rector Demant presented certificates of appreciation to the
Boy Scouts for their volunteer work with t Otsego Egg Hunt Event.
2. Consider Agenda Approval.
CM Heidner motioned to approve as writt .Seconded by CM Tanner. All in favor. Motion
carried.
3. Consent Agenda. (Non -controversial items).
3.1 Approve Claims List.
3.2 Approve City Council Meeting Minutes.
A. April 242017 Board of Review.
B. April 24, 2017 Meeting,
C. April 24, 2017 Special Meeting.
3.3 Approve City Council Special Pay for April 2017.
3.4 Approve Streets Department Seasonal Staff.
Event. `
3.6 Approve Purchase of a Submersible Pump for the Main Lift Station.
3.7 Annrove Minnesota Department of Health Memorandum of Aareem
3.8 Received Advisory Commission Minutes.
A. April 17, 2017 Planning Commission,
3.9 Approve Nextera Lease Agreement.
Rehabilitation Project.
CM Heidner motioned to approve. Seconded by CM Tanner. All in favor. Motio arried.
5/8/17
3ublic Hearing:
W 85th Street and MacIver Avenue
A. Presentation by City Engineer.
B. Mayor to Open the Public Hearing.
C. Close the Public Hearing.
..... .
11 Page
City Planner Licht explained the process and purpose of this meeting and further reviewed the
project. He also stated that the City is using State funding for this project so MnDot reviews the
construction plan for the project and then allocates funds.
Mayor Stockamp opened the Public Hearing at 7:21 PM.
Dennis McAlpine, 8507 Nashua Avenue NE, stated this project doesn't sit very well with him; he feels
there are other ways to get the road access to the school. Mr. McAlpine distributed pictures for review
of his property taken by a drone. He feels the road is too close to his property line and he questioned
if the road could be moved north or centered more. He also stated concern with access to the road
during the construction project as he has a permitted home business.
City Engineer Wagner said six different iterations of locations where reviewed during the discussion
process of this project; he said it's a balancing act between different parcels and the City picked the
one that has the least impact overall. He said moving it to the north would have more impact to the
properties further to the east along 85th Street.
City Engineer Wagner said related to access to the road during construction; the plan would be to talk
to the property owner to the north to get a temporary easement on the driveway and also the
contractor will be required to maintain everyone's driveway to keep access to all residents. City
Planner Licht added City staff did meet with Mr. McAlpine last Thursday and reviewed his concerns.
Jennifer Geraghty, 8511 Nashua Avenue NE, stated safety concern with her kids and access to the
bike path and the 55 MPH speed limit. She questioned why the road cannot move further north. She
also stated concern with her property value.
City Engineer Wagner said that roundabouts are considered safer for pedestrians and bikers because
they have the one direction travel and a shorter crossing. He further stated that the intersections
around the roundabout are only 15 MPH speed limit. As far as the additional driveways; he stated if
we move them further to the north the connection pointe for 85th Street moves further east and that
affects driveways to the east. With this plan it only affects three driveways if we move further to the
north we would have to purchase more property and sever more property. He also addressed the
reconstruction of the portion of 85th Street east of Nashua; the existing grade and how it will be
advised as part of the construction plan. City Planner Licht also stated the design speed of the road
outside of the roundabout is a 55 MPH roadway that is established by state law based on the number
of homes that would be located along the roadway.
Julie Abel, 13786 85th Street NE, asked if the existing section of 85th will stay the same speed limit.
City Planner Licht said yes 40 MPH; the new section going west of Nashua will be 55 MPH speed limit.
Ms. Abel asked about assessments. City Planner Licht stated that the current plan is that the project
is funded entirely by state aid funds. Ms. Abel also commented that she agrees that this will affect the
value of their homes.
Greg Swanson, 13580 85th Street NE, stated concern with the wild life in the area and concern with
losing his berm on his property. He said he would like to be assured that there will be some blockage
of noise and lights. Mr. Swanson stated concern that Hakanson Anderson Engineering was on his
property without notice. City Engineer Wagner said letters were mailed out about a week prior and he
was not sure why Mr. Swanson didn't receive one.
2 1 Page
5/8/17
City Attorney MacArthur explained that if the project goes forward we will have an appraiser that will
look at each one of the properties regarding valuation. He said those items can then be addressed
with the appraiser when he contacts each property owner.
Tom Skoog, 13640 85' Street NE, said his property will not be affected but he is surprised on the
road jagging so much. City Engineer Wagner explained again the reasoning behind the design.
Dennis McAlpine, 8507 Nashua Avenue NE, said he was told it would cost more to put the walkway on
the north side of the road. City Engineer said the bike path is planned for the south side. Mr.
McAlpine expressed concern with liability of the path so close to his property especially with his home
business.
Jennifer Geraghty, 8511 Nashua Avenue NE, asked again why the road can't be moved slightly to the
north. City Engineer Wagner explained again the reasoning behind the design.
Keith Knutson, 6630 Odean Avenue NE, stated this project doesn't affect him; he commented why the
city wouldn't just contact the residents beforehand. City Engineer Wagner explained that the City has
been in contact with the residents in the area and have held a number of meetings and also held an
open house regarding the project.
Greg Swanson, 13580 85th Street NE, questioned the road angle.
Dennis McAlpine, 8507 Nashua Avenue NE, stated again his request to move the street to the north
giving him more room.
City staff explained the timeline. This item will be on the June 26, 2017 City Council meeting for
consideration.
CM Warehime motioned to close the Public Hearing at 8:25 PM. Seconded by CM Tanner.
All in favor. Motion carried.
A. Prelimina Plat UD -c
City Planner Licht presented thto
reviewed the project and thanke
CM Heidner motioned to appro`
Addition Phase 2 subject to the
May 2, 2017. Seconded by CM �
6. Public Works:
Mel
F report. The Developer Paul Tabone, Lennar, was present and
e City Council for their support.
Preliminary Plat and PUD -CUP for Martin Farms 4"
co itions listed in the findings of fact and decision dated
farel%me. All in favor. Motion carried.
City Engineer Wagner presented the staff report.CMNNrehime asked if the pipe going north of the
development have the capacity for development along dler. City Engineer Wagner said yes. CM
Warehime further asked if this connection will allow for t\ocal e Departments to usethe fire
hydrants. City Engineer Wagner said yes. CM Heidner ass will affect the cash fund for the
sewer. City Administrator/ Finance Director Flaherty saidted in the Water Utility Operating
Fund.
- -- - 3�Page
5/8/17
l DEPARTMENT OF
1J NATURAL RESOURCES
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Ecological and Water Resource
1200 Warner Road
St. Paul, MN 55106
June 13, 2017
D. Daniel Licht
City Planner/Zoning Administrator
1340090th Street
Otsego, MN 55330
Re: 85th Street and Maciver Ave Improvements EAW
Dear Mr. Licht,
Transmitted Electronically
The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has reviewed the Environmental Assessment Worksheet
(EAW) for the 85th Street and Maciver Ave Improvements project. We offer the following comments for your
consideration.
The EAW notes that culverts and a cable concrete matt will be used at the crossing of Otsego Creek. This work
will require a Public Waters Work Permit. The EAW also states that a small portion of DNR Public Water Wetland
86033200W may be impacted by the project, this may also require a Permit, depending on the impacts. Page 10
notes that dewatering is not anticipated. Please note that a Water Appropriation Permit is required if
dewatering exceeds a volume of 1.0 million gallons per year, or 10,000 gallons per day. For information on how
to apply for a Public Waters Work Permit of Water Approproparion Permit if needed, visit the website
(http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/mpars/index.html) and/or contact Area Hydrologist Roger Stradal
(Roger.stradaI@state.mn.us).
Page 12 of the EAW should correctly identify that Blanding's turtles are a state -listed threatened species. In
addition, the Blanding's turtle flyer (attached) should be provided to all contractors working in the area. If
Blanding's turtles are encountered on site, state law and rules prohibit the destruction of threatened or
endangered species, except under certain prescribed conditions. If turtles are in imminent danger they must be
moved by hand out of harm's way, otherwise they are to be left undisturbed.
Please consider use of mountable curbs and box inlets on gutters to better allow small animals to exit roadway
(see attached).
Thank you for the consideration of our comments.
Sincerely,
/s/ Rebecca Horton
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources • Ecological and Water Resources
1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106
Curb Design
and Small Animals
Traditional curb and gutter inadvertently directs small
4 -,5
mammals and reptiles into the storm sewer. Animals trying
�T' r
to leave the road are blocked by the steepness and height
of the curb and they will travel parallel to it until they find
-- }„
an exit. The storm sewer is the exit they literally fall into,
,
often with fatal consequences.
z -z•
A design without the side box inlet does give the animals a
better chance of moving past the storm sewer to seek a
safe way off the road. Coincidentally, this design is
increasingly being utilized due to reduced installation and
maintenance costs.
A sloped curb allows small animals to leave the road
surface at any point. Yet it still provides for the collection
and treatment of stormwater. If this modification to the
entire curb system is not possible, a compromise is install
sections of the curb on either side of the storm water drain
for several feet will allow an area for animals to exit.
Priority areas for mountable curbs are those with nearby
wetlands.
(Specify Type D or Type S curb in plans)
In typical rural sections, trapping of animals on road
surfaces is not an issue. Yet the movement onto the road
surface from adjacent areas is a continuing concern. In
areas of known concentrations, a wildlife barrier may be
something to consider to reduce the likelihood of vehicle -
animal collisions.
(http,//www dnr state mn us/waters/watermgmt section /12wpermits/gp 2004 0001 manual.html)
Best Practices for Meeting DNR GP 2004-0001 (version 4, October 2014) Chapter 1, Page 24
CAUTION
BLANDING'S TURTLES
MAY BE ENCOUNTERED
IN THIS AREA
The unique and rare Blanding's turtle has been found in this area. Blanding's turtles are state -listed
as Threatened and are protected under Minnesota Statute 84.095, Protection of Threatened and
Endangered Species. Please be careful of turtles on roads and in construction sites. For additional
information on turtles, or to report a Blanding's turtle sighting, contact the DNR Nongame Specialist
nearest you: Bemidji (218-308-2641); Grand Rapids (218-327-4518); New Ulm (507-359-6033);
Rochester (507-206-2820); or St. Paul (651-259-5772).
DESCRIPTION: The Blanding's turtle is a medium to large turtle (5 to 10 inches) with a black or dark
blue, dome-shaped shell with muted yellow spots and bars. The bottom of the shell is hinged across
the front third, enabling the turtle to pull the front edge of the lower shell firmly against the top shell to
provide additional protection when threatened. The head, legs, and tail are dark brown or blue -gray
with small dots of light brown or yellow. A distinctive field mark is the bright yellow chin and neck.
BLANDING'S TURTLES DO NOT MAKE GOOD PETS
IT IS ILLEGAL TO KEEP THIS THREATENED SPECIES IN CAPTIVITY
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
FOR AVOIDING AND MINIMIZING IMPACTS
TO BLANDING'S TURTLE POPULATIONS
(see Blanding's Turtle Fact Sheet for full recommendations)
• This flyer should be given to all contractors working in the area. Homeowners should
also be informed of the presence of Blanding's turtles in the area.
• Turtles that are in imminent danger should be moved, by hand, out of harm's way.
Turtles that are not in imminent danger should be left undisturbed to continue their
travel among wetlands and/or nest sites.
• If a Blanding's turtle nests in your yard, do not disturb the nest and do not allow pets
near the nest.
• Silt fencing should be set up to keep turtles out of construction areas. It is critical that
silt fencing be removed after the area has been revegetated.
• Small, vegetated temporary wetlands should not be dredged, deepened, or filled.
• All wetlands should be protected from pollution; use of fertilizers and pesticides
should be avoided, and run-off from lawns and streets should be controlled. Erosion
should be prevented to keep sediment from reaching wetlands and lakes.
• Roads should be kept to minimum standards on widths and lanes.
• Roads should be ditched, not curbed or below grade. If curbs must be used, 4" high
curbs at a 3:1 slope are preferred.
• Culverts under roads crossing wetland areas, between wetland areas, or between
wetland and nesting areas should be at least 36 in. diameter and flat-bottomed or
elliptical.
• Culverts under roads crossing streams should be oversized (at least twice as wide as
the normal width of open water) and flat-bottomed or elliptical.
• Utility access and maintenance roads should be kept to a minimum.
• Because trenches can trap turtles, trenches should be checked for turtles prior to being
backfilled and the sites should be returned to original grade.
• Terrain should be left with as much natural contour as possible.
• Graded areas should be revegetated with native grasses and forbs.
• Vegetation management in infrequently mowed areas -- such as in ditches, along
utility access roads, and under power lines -- should be done mechanically (chemicals
should not be used). Work should occur fall through spring (after October 1St and
before June 1S)
Compiled by the Minnesota Department ofNatural Resources Division of Ecological and Water Resources, Updated Augurst 2012
Endangered Species Review Coordinator, 500 Lafayette Rd., Boz 25, St. Paid, AN 55155 / 651-259-5109
', MINNESOTA POLLUTION
J CONTROL AGENCY
520 Lafayette Road North I St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-4194 1 651-296-6300
800-657-3864 1 Use your preferred relay service I info.pca@state.mn.us I Equal Opportunity Employer
June 13, 2017
Mr. D. Daniel Licht
City Planner/Zoning Administrator
City of Otsego
13400 901h Street
Otsego, MN 55330
Re: 85th Street Extension and MacIver Avenue Extension Environmental Assessment Worksheet
Dear Mr. Licht:
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Environmental Assessment Worksheet
(EAW) for the 85`h Street Extension and MacIver Avenue Extension project (Project) located in the city of
Otsego, Wright County, Minnesota. The Project consists of the extension of 85`h Street and MacIver
Avenue. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) staff has reviewed the EAW and have no
comments at this time.
We appreciate the opportunity to review this Project. 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
EAW, please contact me by email at Karen.kromar@state.mn.us or by telephone at 651-757-2508.
Sincerely,
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
0ST. PAUL, MN 55101-1678
REPLY TO ATTENTION OF JUN 13 2017
REGULATORY BRANCH
Regulatory File No. MVP-2017-01362-MLV
Hakanson Anderson
c/o: Mr. Ronald Wagner
3601 Thurston Avenue
Anoka, Minnesota 55303
Dear Mr. Anderson:
We have received the document entitled "Environmental Assessment Worksheet" (EAW)
dated July 2013 regarding the proposed construction of a two-mile long collecter street. The
project site is located in Section 11, Township 30 North, Range 24 West, Anoka County,
Minnesota. This letter contains our initial comments on this project and provides general
information regarding the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) regulatory program for your
consideration.
A review of the proposal indicates potential impacts to multiple wetlands and the tributary
Otsego Creek. The proposal also indicates the construction of stormwater treatment basins and
routing to wetlands and Otsego Creek associated with the project. A wetland delineation is
recommended to confirm the wetland boundaries.
When a proposal involves discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States,
it may be subject to the Corps of Engineers' jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA Section 404). Waters of the United States include navigable waters, their tributaries, and
adjacent wetlands (33 CFR § 328.3). CWA Section 301(a) prohibits discharges of dredged or fill
material into waters of the United States, unless the work has been authorized by a Department
of the Army permit under Section 404.
If the proposal involves activity in navigable waters of the United States, it may be subject to
the Corps of Engineers' jurisdiction under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899
(Section 10). Section 10 prohibits the construction, excavation, or deposition of materials in, over,
or under navigable waters of the United States, or any work that would affect the course, location,
condition, or capacity of those waters, unless the work has been authorized by a Department of
the Army permit. Information about the Corps permitting process can be obtained online at
http://www.mvp.usace.army.mil/regulatory.
The Corps' evaluation of a Section 10 and/or a Section 404 permit application involves
multiple analyses, including (1) evaluating the proposal's impacts in accordance with the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (33 CFR part 325), (2) determining whether the proposal is
contrary to the public interest (33 CFR § 320.4), and (3) in the case of a Section 404 permit,
determining whether the proposal complies with the Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines (Guidelines)
(40 CFR part 230).
If the proposal requires a Section 404 permit application, the Guidelines specifically require
that "no discharge of dredged or fill material shall be permitted if there is a practicable alternative
to the proposed discharge which would have less adverse impact on the aquatic ecosystem, so
Regulatory Branch (File No. MVP-2017-01362-MLV)
long as the alternative does not have other significant adverse environmental consequences" (40
CFR § 230.10(a)). Applicants are advised not to purchase any wetland credits until a permit
decision has been made by the Corps. Time and money spent on the proposal prior to applying
for a Section 404 permit cannot be factored into the Corps' decision whether there is a less
damaging practicable alternative to the proposal.
If an application for a Corps permit has not yet been submitted, the project proposer may
request a pre -application consultation meeting with the Corps to obtain information regarding the
data, studies or other information that will be necessary for the permit evaluation process. A pre -
application consultation meeting is strongly recommended if the proposal has substantial impacts
to waters of the United States, or if it is a large or controversial project.
If you have any questions, please contact me in our St. Paul office at (651) 290-5362 or
Marissa.L.Vine@usace.army.mil. In any correspondence or inquiries, please refer to the
Regulatory file number shown above.
cc:
D. Daniel Licht, AICP
Sincerely,
Marissa Vine
Project Manager
Page 2 of 2
P
OtCI�ezoF
MINNESOTA V
APPLICANT: City of Otsego
21 Jun 17
FINDINGS OF FACT
NEGATIVE DECARATION
APPLICATION: Consideration of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the 85th
Street and MacIver Avenue Extension project.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING: 12 June 2017
FINDINGS: Based upon review of the application and evidence received, the Otsego City Council
now makes the following findings of fact:
1. The City of Otsego is proposing to construct 85th Street, from Nashua Avenue to one-half
mile west of Mason Avenue, and MacIver Avenue from 85th Street for one-half mile south to
80th Street (project).
2. The project requires preparation of a mandatory EAW in accordance with Minnesota Rules
4410.4300, Subp 22.
3.
4. The project is a two mile long collector street and Municipal State Aid (MSA) roadway that is
included in the 2012 Otsego Comprehensive Plan Transportation Plan.
5. An EAW was prepared by the City, distributed to government agencies, published by the
Environmental Quality Board on May 15, 2017;
6. The EAW is subject to a 30 day comment period that ended on June 14, 2017; comments
received during the 30 day comment period incorporated herein by reference are:
A. Letter from Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) dated June 13, 2017.
B. Letter from Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) dated June 13, 2017.
C. Letter from the Army Corps of Engineers dated June 13, 2017
7. The City Council held a public hearing at their regular meeting on May 8, 2017 to receive
public input regarding the EAW, preceded by published and mailed notice; based upon
review of the EAW and evidence received, the City Council closed the public hearing.
8. The City Council, in deciding whether a project has the potential for significant environmental
effects, shall consider the following factors established by Minnesota Rules 4410.1700,
Subp. 7:
A. Type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects;
1
Finding: The potential for environmental effects has been minimized in the project
design and alignment and will be mitigated in accordance with Federal, State, and
City laws, rules, and ordinances and use of Best Management Practices.
B. Cumulative potential effects. The City Council shall consider the following factors:
whether the cumulative potential effect is significant; whether the contribution from
the project is significant when viewed in connection with other contributions to the
cumulative potential effect; the degree to which the project complies with approved
mitigation measures specifically designed to address the cumulative potential effect;
and the efforts of the proposer to minimize the contributions from the project;
Finding: The project is occurring in accordance with the 2012 Otsego
Comprehensive Plan; Federal, State and City laws, rules and ordinances; and Best
Management Practices to minimize and mitigate potential environmental effects. No
cumulative potential environmental effects are anticipated.
C. The extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing
public regulatory authority. The City Council may rely only on mitigation measures
that are specific and that can be reasonably expected to effectively mitigate the
identified environmental impacts of the project; and
Finding: The EAW document outlines potential environmental effects subject to
mitigation measures overseen by public agencies, including the City. The City will
obtain all required permits and approvals for the project as outlined in Paragraph 8 of
the EAW. The permitting and approval process for mitigation measures subject to
review by public agencies is reasonably expected to effectively mitigate the identified
impacts.
D. the extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a
result of other available environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the
project proposer, including other EISs.
Finding: The EAW summarizes anticipated potential environmental effects related to
the project and outlines measures to minimize, control, and mitigate those potential
effects in accordance with Federal, State and City laws, rules and ordinances and
Best Management Practices.
9. The EAW, as approved by the City Planner (The Planning Company LLC) dated 2 May 2018,
is incorporated herein by reference.
DECISION: Based on the foregoing findings, the City Council hereby adopts a Negative
Declaration, as the 85`h Street & MacIver Avenue Extension project has no potential for
environmental effects, and preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement is not required,
subject to the following conditions:
Paragraph 13.b of the final EAW document shall be revised to state that Blanding's turtles
are a state listed threatened species.
2. The City Engineer shall distribute the information sheets provide by the DNR regarding
Blanding's turtles with all construction plan sets.
3. The City shall obtain all required permits and approvals as outlined in Paragraph 8 of the
EAW.
2
MOTION BY:
SECOND BY:
ALL IN FAVOR:
THOSE OPPOSED:
Attest:
ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Otsego this 26th day of June, 2017.
Tami Loff, City Clerk
3
CITY OF OTSEGO
By:
Jessica L. Stockamp, Mayor