HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.m. UMore AUAR Update
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
City Council Regular Meeting: October 16, 2018
AGENDA ITEM: UMore AUAR Update AGENDA SECTION:
Consent
PREPARED BY: Kim Lindquist, Community Development
Director AGENDA NO. 6.m.
ATTACHMENTS: Resolution; UMore AUAR Update,
Comment Memorandum dated October
8, 2018, Comment Letters
APPROVED BY: LJM
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the Adoption of the
UMore Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) Update 2018.
ISSUE
The City Council adopted the UMore Study Area AUAR (Alternative Urban Areawide Review) in 2013.
State Statute requires that the City review and update the AUAR every five years and allow the required
reviewing agencies to comment on the update. The agency comment period expired on October 1, 2018. All
comments received and any document modifications are itemized in the attached comment memorandum.
There were four commenting agencies, although Minnesota Department of Transportation and the State
indicated that they didn’t have any comments. Maintaining a current AUAR allows developers to move
forward without separate, project specific environmental reviews. This is benefit to both the developer and
landowner since costs and time are decreased in the entitlement process.
DISCUSSION
Staff prepared an update to the UMore AUAR which was initially adopted in 2013. The AUAR covers
about 5,000 acres and includes lands in Rosemount and Empire Township. The initial AUAR was a joint
venture and the Township as well as UMore staff reviewed the update document prior to it going out for
agency comments. Because there has been no development within the Study area since the adoption of the
2013 AUAR there are only minor modifications needed to maintain the AUAR current. The mining activity
in the western portion of the UMore property was reviewed under a separate Environmental Impact
Statement process and is not part of the AUAR.
The review was published in the EQB Monitor and was posted in the City’s website. As mentioned three
agencies responded. The comments received resulted in minor modification to the update including adding a
DNR fact sheet to the update, revising mitigation measure 7D relating to the 42/52 interchange, and taking
under advisement the listing of unsealed and abandoned wells.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the UMore AUAR Study Area Update.
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. ______
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ADOPTION OF THE
UMORE STUDY AREA
ALTERNATIVE URBAN AREAWIDE REVIEW (AUAR) UPDATE 2018
WHEREAS, an AUAR Update has been completed for the project pursuant to Minnesota Rules 4410 which
identifies and assesses the environmental impacts and mitigation measures associated with the UMore Study
Area;
WHEREAS, the AUAR was updated pursuant to Minnesota Rule 4410.3610;
WHEREAS, the AUAR Update was distributed for the required 10-day comment period;
WHEREAS, comments received on the AUAR Update have generated information adequate to determine
mitigation measures associated with the potential development in this area;
WHEREAS, the comments received and the City’s responses to these comments are included in the public
record for the AUAR;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Rosemount, MN that the City of
Rosemount adopts the UMore Study Area AUAR Update dated August 2018 with revision October 2018.
ADOPTED this 16th day of October 2018, by the City Council of the City of Rosemount.
______________________________
William H. Droste, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Erin Fasbender, City Clerk
FINAL ALTERNATIVE
URBAN AREAWIDE
REVIEW UPDATE
UMORE STUDY AREA
ORIGINAL AUAR: AUGUST 2013
UPDATE 1: AUGUST 2018
REVISED: OCTOBER 2018
Prepared for:
City of Rosemount, Minnesota
WSB PROJECT NO. 12383-000
FINAL ALTERNATIVE URBAN AREAWIDE REVIEW UPDATE
Final Alternative Urban Areawide Review Update
UMore Study Area
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No. 12383-000
UMore Study Area
FOR THE
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT, MINNESOTA
Final
Original AUAR: August 2013
Update 1: August 2018
Revised: October 8, 2018
Prepared By:
WSB & Associates, Inc. City of Rosemount
701 Xenia Avenue – Suite 300 2875 145th Street West
Minneapolis, MN 55416 Rosemount, MN 55068
763-541-4800 651-322-2020
amoffatt@wsbeng.com kim.lindquist@ci.rosemount.mn.us
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Final Alternative Urban Areawide Review Update
UMore Study Area
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No. 12383-000
TITLE SHEET
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Introduction and Purpose ........................................................................................1
II. Approved Development/Current Conditions .......................................................3
III. Areas Remaining to be Developed ..........................................................................3
IV. Update to the Environmental Review ....................................................................3
V. Mitigation Summary and Update ............................................................................5
VI. AUAR Update Review...............................................................................................14
Appendix A – Figures
Figure 1. General Location Map
Figure 2. USGS Topographic Map
Figure 3. Aerial Photo
Figure 4. Scenario 1
Figure 5. Scenario 2
Figure 6. Scenario 3
Figure 7. Scenario 4
Figure 8. Transition to Scenario 3
Figure 9. Trails Map
Figure 10. Wellhead Protection Areas
Appendix B – DNR Natural Heritage Database Review
Appendix C – Comments and Responses to the AUAR Update
Final Alternative Urban Areawide Review Update Page 1
UMore Study Area
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No. 12383-000
I. Introduction and Purpose
The UMore Study Area is approximately 4,900 acres located in the southern portion of
the City of Rosemount and the northern portion of Empire Township (Appendix A -
Figure 1-3). The City of Rosemount adopted the UMore Alternative Urban Areawide
Review (AUAR) in August 2013. Pursuant to Minnesota Rules 4410.3610 Subp. 7, for
the AUAR to remain valid as the environmental review document for the area, the
document needs to be updated every five years until all development in the study area
has received final approval. Since undeveloped areas still remain in the study area and
the AUAR will expire in 2018, the purpose of this document is to update the AUAR
pursuant to Minnesota Rules.
The 2013 AUAR included an analysis of four development scenarios as follows:
Scenario 1 (Figure 4, Appendix A)
Scenario 1 contains residential, commercial, industrial, mixed-use, and
park/open spaces uses organized around a neighborhood, village, community,
or regional center. Long-term, the plan accommodates a transit connection
between the three higher density center areas and points north of the UMore
site. An extensive planned system of greenways and open space meanders
through the site accommodating active and passive recreational uses,
preservation of natural features, and establishing corridors for wildlife
movement.
On the west side of the site, development will surround a new lake that will be
an amenity resulting from gravel mining operations. The gravel mining area was
the subject of an Environmental Impact Statement. The Record of Decision for
the UMore Park Sand and Gravel Resources Project EIS was published in
November of 2010.
County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 46 bisects the site in an east/west direction
forming the boundary between the City of Rosemount and Empire Township.
Akron Avenue and Blaine Avenue will be extended through the site and will be
transferred to Dakota County following construction and connection to the
overall Dakota County highway system. In the north, the UMore Park property
surrounds the Dakota County Technical College (DCTC) which abuts County
State Aid Highway (CSAH) 42.
Residential uses occur in four different density classifications ranging from low
density (1 – 3.5 units/acre) to high density (12 – 24 units per acre). Scenario 1
uses the maximum density within the residential ranges to determine
population. Neighborhood, village, community, and regional centers contain
varying mixes of residential and non-residential uses. Employment land uses,
which are generally concentrated in the eastern portion of the site, include
Final Alternative Urban Areawide Review Update Page 2
UMore Study Area
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No. 12383-000
office/business park and light industrial uses. Scenario 1 accommodates a
future population of approximately 35,000 people and about 18,000 jobs.
Scenario 2 (Figure 5, Appendix A)
The quantities and locations of future land uses shown on Scenario 2 are
identical to those shown on Scenario 1. Scenario 2 allows testing of an
alternative that has residential densities that are more in line with the
traditional densities in suburban communities like the City of Rosemount. For
this scenario, the middle of the residential density ranges has been used for the
low density, low-medium density, medium density and high density categories.
As a result, Scenario 2 projects a future population of approximately 25,000
people and about 18,000 jobs.
Scenario 3 (Figure 6, Appendix A)
Scenario 3 is intended to examine the implications of a future land use pattern
that includes expanded employment opportunities. With the exception of areas
lying between Barbara and Blaine Avenues, the land use pattern shown on
Scenario 3 is identical to that shown on Scenarios 1 and 2. Scenario 3 replaces
largely residential uses located west of Blaine Avenue with office/business park
uses and light industrial. The maximum residential densities are used, the same
as used in Scenario 1. As a result, Scenario 3 accommodates a future population
of approximately 31,500 people and about 24,500 jobs.
Scenario 4 – Comprehensive Plans (Figure 7, Appendix A)
Scenario 4 depicted the comprehensive plans for both the City of Rosemount
and Empire Township in 2013. Both comprehensive plans recognize UMore
Park and reference future growth and development. Rosemount’s plan
categorizes the UMore site as Agricultural Research (AGR). The plan states,
“This land use designation is used solely for the UMore Park property that is
owned and operated by the University of Minnesota. It is anticipated that, after
the UMore Park Master Plan is created and adopted, a major Comprehensive
Plan amendment will be conducted to re-designate the land to its appropriate
land use category.”
In 2018, the City is completing a Comprehensive Plan amendment to change the
land use on 474 acres in the northeast corner of the study area from
Agricultural Research to Business Park. This change generally reflects the land
use scenarios contemplated within the AUAR for Scenario 3. While the exact
location of the Business Park land use is not in the same location as shown in
the AUAR Study Area, the scenario analysis does contemplate Business Park
uses and the 474 acres of Business Park conforms to the AUAR analysis.
The City is also in the process of completing its 2040 Comprehensive Plan that
will guide land use in the UMore Study area to reflect the AUAR land uses.
Final Alternative Urban Areawide Review Update Page 3
UMore Study Area
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No. 12383-000
Figure 8, Appendix A shows this transition of land use from the 2030
Comprehensive Plan to the 2040 Comprehensive Plan to reflect Scenario 3.
These 2040 Comprehensive Plan land uses are in conformance with or are less
intensive than Scenario 3 and therefore conform to the AUAR.
There have been no changes to land use in the Empire Township portion of the
study area.
The August 2013 adopted AUAR is available for review on the City’s web-site at
https://www.ci.rosemount.mn.us/DocumentCenter/View/845/AUAR---Final?bidId.
This report is intended to serve as an update of the AUAR, and includes a review of the
areas that have and have not developed, an update to the environmental analysis as
needed, and a review of the mitigation measures.
II. Approved Development/Current Conditions
No development has been approved within the study area since 2013. The gravel
mining operation in the western portion of the study area has progressed. This work is
outside of the AUAR and a separate, individual Environmental Impact Study (EIS) was
completed for this work in 2010.
III. Areas Remaining to be Developed
No developed has occurred or has been approved since the 2013 AUAR was adopted.
The full 4,900 acres remain to be developed between the City of Rosemount and
Empire Township.
Timeline: The City of Rosemount and Empire Township anticipate development to
occur over the next 25 to 35 years depending on market conditions. Development is
expected to be phased from the north in Rosemount along County State Aid Highway
(CSAH) 42 to the south extending into Empire Township. The timing of development in
the western portion of the study area will be influenced by the timing of mineral
extraction and restoration of the property to accommodate urban development.
IV. Update to the Environmental Review
Threatened and Endangered Species: The DNR Natural Heritage Database
information was updated for this AUAR Update. Based on this update, in addition to
what was included in the original AUAR, a few additional bird species were noted by
the DNR, including Bell’s Vireo, Purple Martin, and Lark Sparrow. The mitigation
measures from the original AUAR are adequate to address this updated information.
The information from the DNR is in Appendix B.
Historical and Cultural Resources: Updated data from the State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO) was requested. There are no new listings within the project
area since the 2013 AUAR.
Final Alternative Urban Areawide Review Update Page 4
UMore Study Area
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No. 12383-000
Hazardous Waste and Contamination: A review of the current Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency (MPCA) What’s in My Neighborhood Database was completed to
identify sites with known, or suspected contamination within the study area.
Additional or updates sites of potential environmental concern that were not identified
in the in the 2013 AUAR, and pertinent updates to sites previously identified in the
2013 AUAR, are summarized below:
New Sites
• Empire MSW Processing & SSOM Compost Facility – Located on the eastern
portion of the study area at 16545 Blaine Avenue, Rosemount, MN. The site is
listed on the Permitted Solid Waste Facility and Minimal Quantity Hazardous
Waste Generator databases. The status of the listings is reported as active as of
May 18, 2017. No violations associated for the site were reported.
Updates to Existing Sites
• U of M Rosemount Research Center – Located on the southern portion of the
study area. Annual hazardous waste generation reports were submitted for the
site for the years 2014, 2015, 2016, and 2018. Also, recent Superfund activities
include; a VIC – Phase II Work Plan Approval in 2014, a Technical Work Plan
Review in 2015, and a Site Visit in 2015.
• UMore Park - Located on the western portion of the study area. Recent MPCA
Brownfields activities include a VIC – Response Action Plan Approval, Technical
Work Plan Review, and Technical Review of a Remedial Investigation Report in
2014, and Site Closure in 2015. Also, recent Superfund activities include
multiple Technical Report Reviews in 2015, a Remedial Investigation Work Plan
Review, Sampling and Analytical Project Plan Review, Quality Assurance Project
Plan Review, Work Plan Review, Technical Review of Work Plan, and Public
Meeting Conducted in 2016, and a Remedial Investigation Report Review in
2017.
• Gopher Ordnance Plant - Located on the central portion of the study area.
Recent Superfund activities include; a Site Visit, MDH Health Evaluation, and
issuance of a Commissioner Notice Letter in 2014, other Report Type Review in
2015, and a Responsible Party Search, Remedial Investigation Report Review,
and completion of a EPA Preliminary Assessment in 2016.
Municipal Water and Sewer: The City completed the “East Side Utilities Study” in May
2016. The purpose of this study was to further refine recommendations for providing
municipal utility service to the East Side of Rosemount, generally east of TH52. While
this study was primarily outside of the UMore study area, it did include the very
eastern portion of the UMore AUAR Study Area. No changes to the UMore AUAR are
needed as a result of this study. This study is available upon request.
Final Alternative Urban Areawide Review Update Page 5
UMore Study Area
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No. 12383-000
In a June 6, 2017 memo, the City evaluated possible utility extensions to the area south
of CSAH 42 and west of Dakota County Technical College to serve a small portion of the
UMore Study Area. Based on the review, water and sewer could be extended to the
area and no lift stations would be required to serve this planned, small residential area
until such time as more development occurred in the area. No development has
occurred since this 2017 study and no changes in mitigation in the AUAR resulted from
this study.
The City is currently evaluating the sanitary sewer extension from the north side of
CSAH 42 along the west side of TH 52 to determine if a small portion of development in
the northeast corner of the UMore development could be served without the use of a
lift station. This study is ongoing. However, it is not anticipated to alter the mitigation
items in the UMore AUAR, but rather investigate an interim developed condition prior
to the larger area being developed.
Stormwater Management: Stormwater management regulations continue to change.
Within the City of Rosemount, the City’s stormwater management regulations apply.
Within Empire Township, the Vermillion River Watershed Joint Powers Organization’s
(VRWJPO) regulations apply. The City and VRWJPO have adopted new rules in 2017.
Mitigation measures have been revised based on these changes.
Transportation: Since the AUAR was completed in 2013, the interchange at TH52 and
CSAH 42 was reconstructed. This item was listed in the mitigation items in the AUAR.
No other changes to the traffic study are needed.
Parks and Trails: The 2013 AUAR included discussion of regional trails. Dakota
County has approved a master plan for the Vermillion Highlands Greenway Regional
Trail. This trail is proposed to travel through the study area. The planned Vermillion
Highlands Greenway Trail will connect Lebanon Hills Regional Park in Eagan to
Whitetail Woods Regional Park in Farmington. This regional trail is part of the
Metropolitan Regional Parks System and is governed by the Council’s 2040 Regional
Parks Policy Plan. The City has continued to develop its trail network throughout the
city. Figure 9, Appendix A shows the existing and proposed trail network.
V. Mitigation Summary and Update
The mitigation measures developed in the original AUAR are outlined below. If a
mitigation measure has been revised, the changes are shown with underlined or
stricken text.
1. Fish, Wildlife, and Ecologically Sensitive Resources
A. Wetlands will need to be delineated in conformance with the Wetland
Conservation Act as part of the development process. Depending on the location
of the wetlands, either the City of Rosemount or Empire Township will review
and verify the wetland delineation.
Final Alternative Urban Areawide Review Update Page 6
UMore Study Area
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No. 12383-000
B. Wetland impact is anticipated to be minimized to the maximum extent practical
and feasible throughout the review area. If wetland impacts are proposed,
wetland mitigation will be required of the project proposer pursuant to current
wetland regulations and City or Township requirements.
C. The City of Rosemount and Empire Township will require buffers around
wetlands at a width dependent upon the wetland's management classification,
per their respective ordinances.
D. Stormwater management features should incorporate native plantings of grasses,
trees, and shrubs.
E. A loggerhead shrike survey is recommended by the DNR as part of a
development project if disturbance would be planned during the nesting season
within suitable habitat areas (nesting season is generally April through July).
The DNR will need to be contacted before any survey work is completed.
F. While ideally suited habitat for Blanding’s turtles is not apparent within the study
area, they have been noted near the study area and some habitat in the area could
be marginally suitable. Development projects should take into consideration the
use of oversized culverts, surmountable curbs, and revegetation with native
species.
G. Development plans for the northeastern corner of the site will consider
incorporating the oak woodland that has been identified on the County Biological
Survey as open space to protect or enhance this habitat to the extent practical.
H. Development plans will consider incorporating the existing or remaining wildlife
habitat areas within the Regionally Significant Ecological Areas (RSEA) and other
areas within the site as open space to the extent practical. However, depending on
environmental remediation that may be required, disturbance of these areas may
be necessary.
I. Tree removal within the study area that occurs as part of development will need
to meet the requirements of the City’s or Township’s Tree Preservation
Ordinance.
2. Water Use Mitigation Plan
A. Extend trunk water main services as shown in Figures 13-3 through 13-5 of
the original AUAR consistent with the Comprehensive Water Plan (CWP). For
Scenario 1, an additional 16” trunk main may be extended from the intersection
of Akron Avenue and CSAH 42 to approximately 2,600 feet east of the
intersection of CSAH 42 and Blaine Avenue.
Final Alternative Urban Areawide Review Update Page 7
UMore Study Area
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No. 12383-000
B. 6-8 municipal wells are recommended as a result of this development, with up
to 2 of the wells being in addition to what was planned as part of the CWP. For
Scenario 1, one well may be located within the study area depending upon the
trunk water mains extended to the development (see Figure 13-3 – Alt. 2 in
original AUAR). Well fields have been preliminarily allocated to the north and to
the east of the study area close to the future water treatment plants, in
accordance with the CWP.
C. 2,750,000 to 3,500,000 gallons of water system storage is recommended as a
result of this development, with up to 700,000 gallons being in addition to what
was planned as part of the City’s CWP. The storage should be constructed in a
location to best serve the entire City and overall water system.
D. Any abandoned wells found within the study area will be sealed in accordance
with Dakota County Ordinance No. 114, Well and Water Supply Management,
and Minnesota Department of Health guidelines.
E. In accordance with the City’s Wellhead Protection Plan (WHPP), continue
protection of the existing Drinking Water Supply Management Area (DWSMA)
located in the study area as shown in Figure 13-2 in the original AUAR. A
DWSMA will be established for future wells as they are constructed and the
WHPP is updated.
F. There exists potential for future interconnection of the proposed water system
in the study area between the City of Rosemount and Empire Township.
Additional water system assessments and agreements between the City of
Rosemount and Empire Township may be required if further development
interests beyond the presented material were to arise.
G. Industrial and Business Park land use water demands can be highly variable
depending upon the business operation or manufacturing process employed at
each property. At the time of the five year AUAR evaluation, water demands
from individual properties in the Industrial and Business Park land use areas
should be evaluated and estimated future demands revised if necessary.
H. Any new wells (supply, dewatering, monitoring, or other) shall be constructed
in accordance with Dakota County Ordinance 114, Minnesota Statutes Chapter
103I and Minnesota Rules Chapter 4725.
3. Erosion and Sedimentation Mitigation Plan
A. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to the extent required by
NPDES regulations will be needed for any development in the study area.
Final Alternative Urban Areawide Review Update Page 8
UMore Study Area
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No. 12383-000
Review of the SWPPP for each development will be required by the City or the
Township.
4. Water Quantity and Quality Mitigation Plan
A. Each new development within the AUAR area will need to incorporate BMPs to
meet applicable water quantity and water quality regulatory requirements.
These policies are outlined in the local stormwater management requirements
section. The soils within the AUAR area are primarily comprised of Hydrologic
Soil Group A and B soils; therefore, it is likely that these policies will be met
using infiltration.
B. Infiltration to the Rosemount or Empire Township’s standards will be provided
on each development site or in a regional infiltration system that is created to
serve a defined drainage area. The selection of a development-specific or
regional system will be based on identifying feasible areas that take into
consideration soils, drainage patterns, existing and past land use, and other
factors. Areas where infiltration is not feasible or where contamination is
possible will not be used for infiltration practices.
Based on the City’s Wellhead Protection Plan, infiltration outside the Emergency
Response Area (ERA) within the Drinking Water Supply Management Area
(DWSMA) (1-10-year travel zone) shown on Figure 10, Appendix A can be
allowed with the following restrictions:
• Require NURP ponding pretreatment prior to infiltration. Encourage
developer to line NURP pond to reduce infiltration and retain a wet pool
volume.
• If the infiltration practice is constructed in industrial, commercial, or
transportation land uses, ensure that emergency procedures for
containment of spills are established and acceptable.
• Infiltration is not recommended in areas that receive discharges from
vehicle fueling and maintenance.
• Infiltration is not recommended in areas that receive discharges from
industrial facilities that are not authorized to infiltrate industrial
stormwater under an NPDES/SDS Industrial Stormwater Permit issued by
the MPCA.
• Infiltration is not recommended in areas where soil infiltration rates are
more than 8.3 inches per hour unless soils are amended to slow the
infiltration rate below 8.3 inches per hour or as allowed by a local unit of
government with a current MS4 permit. This can be accomplished by
providing a biofiltration compost mix at the bottom of the infiltration basin
or through the use of a spray on mulch.
• Utilize additional guidance from MDH and MPCA for infiltration activities
within the DWSMA.
Final Alternative Urban Areawide Review Update Page 9
UMore Study Area
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No. 12383-000
C. To protect adjacent structures, an overflow from the Lake 2162 will be
developed that would allow water to overflow either to the northeast toward
pond 2246 or to the South toward the Vermillion River. This overflow could
potentially occur if a rainfall event occurs that exceeds a 100-year 24-hour
event, and/or water elevations reach extremely high levels. Based on this
analysis and the installation of the proposed BMP’S, the volume of runoff
generated within the AUAR area will be significantly reduced in the future, and
the corresponding probability of this overflow occurring will be also reduced
from that which exists today. Discharge rates to the north will be in accordance
with the City of Rosemount Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan.
Discharges to the Vermillion River from the City of Rosemount will not exceed
the intercommunity flowrate standards established by the most current version
of Vermillion River Watershed Joint Powers Organization (VRWJPO) model or
follow the procedures outlined in the VRWJPO rules.
D. If any storm water in the study area within Empire Township is to be directed
to the City of Rosemount, the Rosemount infiltration standard will be applied to
the development.
E. Design considerations for comprehensive stormwater management should
include regional ponding.
F. Approved TMDL load reductions and implementation plans shall be addressed
by a development’s stormwater management plan. These will need to be
addressed per the schedule identified in the current version the MS4 permit.
The proposed language states “For TMDLs approved prior to the effective date
of the MS4 permit the Waste Load Allocation (WLA) discharge requirement will
become a requirement of the permittee”.
G. In the City of Rosemount, post-development discharge rates will be limited to
0.05 cfs/acre of the 100-year, 24-hour event. For newly developing areas, no
discharge or infiltration can be assumed for purposes of establishing the 100-
year, 24-hour storm event high water elevation. Storage of the runoff from the
100-year, 24-hour storm event is required to be provided on-site or in a
regional basin and an appropriately sized infiltration area is required capable of
infiltrating captured runoff at a rate of 1/12 of an acre-foot/acre/day. For
events with longer duration, a maximum peak stormwater discharge rate will
be limited to 0.05cfs/acre.
H. In Empire Township, development that creates one or more acres of new
impervious surface must incorporate volume control practices into the design
sufficient to prevent an increase in the runoff volume for the 2-year 24-hour
storm above 2005 conditions unless waived in accordance with Runoff Volume
Final Alternative Urban Areawide Review Update Page 10
UMore Study Area
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No. 12383-000
Control Criteria 6. It will be required that post-development discharge rates
will not be greater than pre-development discharge rates for the 1-year and 10-
year, 24-hour storm critical duration events to reduce erosion impacts
downstream of the site.
I. The developer will be responsible for grading the site appropriately to provide
adequate stormwater management to the extent necessary and will be required
to obtain the necessary permits for stormwater management and grading, to
preserve the existing natural features, and to provide water quality protection
to meet MPCA Construction General Permit requirements in addition to City of
Rosemount, Empire Township, and VRWJPO requirements.
J. Stormwater will be required to be pretreated to achieve NURP standards as
outlined in the City of Rosemount Engineering Guidelines prior to discharge to
wetlands and Lake 2162.
K. A SWPPP required by the NPDES regulations will be needed for any
development in the study area. Review of the SWPPP for each development will
be required by the City and Township.
5. Wastewater Mitigation Plan
A. Figures 18-3, 18-4, and 18-5 in the original AUAR show conceptual layout of
gravity sewers, lift stations and forcemains to serve the proposed study area
under each scenario. All of the scenarios maintain an identical pipe layout
network and can be identified by sewer district or Rosemount Interceptor
connection points as defined in Figure 18-2 in the original AUAR.
B. The East sewer district consists primarily of gravity sewers, and two lift stations
and forcemains that convey wastewater north to the Rosemount Interceptor
along County Road (CR) 42. The south lift station capacity ranges from 700 gpm
to 900 gpm and the north lift station capacity ranges from 1,700 gpm to 2,000
gpm in capacity, depending on the scenario. Sewers within the East sewer
district range between 8” and 21” in diameter.
C. The Central sewer district consists of primarily gravity sewers, and one lift
station and forcemain that convey the wastewater north to the Rosemount
Interceptor along CR 42. The lift station ranges in capacity from 1,600 gpm to
2,000 gpm depending on the scenario. Sewers within the Central sewer district
range in size from 8” to 24” in diameter.
D. The Northwest sewer district consists of all gravity sewers which flows to the
north and discharges to the Rosemount Interceptor along CR 42. The gravity
sewer ranges in size from 8” to 21” depending on the scenario.
Final Alternative Urban Areawide Review Update Page 11
UMore Study Area
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No. 12383-000
E. Similar to the Northwest sewer district, the Southwest sewer district consists of
all gravity sewers. Wastewater flows to the west where it discharges to the
Rosemount Interceptor along Biscayne Ave. The gravity sewers in the
Southwest district range in size from 8” to 15” in diameter.
6. Geologic Hazards and Soil Conditions Mitigation Plan
A. NPDES Phase II Construction Site permit will be required for development
within the study area. This permit requires a site specific Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to be completed for construction. This SWPPP is
required to include pollution prevention management measures for solid waste
and hazardous material spills that occur during construction.
B. Development or construction work will require conformance with the City spill
response plan. Spills will be reported to the Minnesota State Duty Officer and
911, along with applicable City staff. Those authorities will in turn notify any
other appropriate officials depending on the nature of the incident.
C. For all gas stations with underground tanks, annual licensing from the MPCA
will be needed.
D. The area of partially hydric soils in the northeast corner of the site will be
considered is proposed to remain as a natural open space area.
E. Should any other conditions be identified during site development activities
that have the potential to materially impact either groundwater recharge or
groundwater quality, investigations will be conducted and mitigation measures
will be identified to address the impact consistent with applicable State and
Federal requirements.
F. Project contingency plans should be prepared and reviewed/approved by MPCA
to address potential releases of hazardous substances identified during
construction activities. These plans should include current Phase I evaluations
prior to beginning construction activities to identify potential releases.
G. The City requests project proposers prepare and submit to the MPCA
Construction Contingency Plans (“CCPs”) to help identify and address any
potential releases of hazardous substances that may be encountered during
construction activities. Phase I Environmental Site Assessments should also be
completed for the proposed project area and submitted to MPCA along with the
CCPs.
H. Any business or institutional uses that use or store petroleum or other
hazardous products will be subject to local and state rules regulating such uses.
Final Alternative Urban Areawide Review Update Page 12
UMore Study Area
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No. 12383-000
7. Transportation Mitigation Plan
A. Evaluate and compare the traffic analysis prepared as part of the AUAR in
coordination with the City of Rosemount, Empire Township and Dakota County
with detailed roadway mitigation. Evaluations will occur with each large scale
development plan submitted for approval, the City, Township and County
Comprehensive Plan updates and/or with each five year AUAR review.
B. Expansion of CSAH 42 from Biscayne Avenue to US 52 from 4 lanes to 6 lanes
when warranted by traffic volumes.
C. Construction of an interchange to replace the existing TH 3/CSAH 42
intersection. Interchange geometry will be proposed with future studies.
D. Reconstruction of the existing interchange at CSAH 42 and US 52 as a system
interchange to accommodate higher turning movements. The City of
Rosemount’s and Dakota County’s 2030 Comprehensive Plans have identified
this interchange as potentially serving a rerouted alignment of TH 55 in the
future. Interchange configuration and lane geometry will be determined in
future studies. – This item has been partially completed. The US 52 and CSAH 42
interchange was reconstructed to extend the 4-lane section on CSAH 42 through
the interchange and to include east and westbound left turn lanes.
E. Addition of intersection control (signal, roundabout, etc.), documented in an
Intersection Control Evaluation report, at locations that meet the required
traffic warrants and intersection spacing guidelines in accordance with the City,
County, and Township including the updated CSAH 42 Segment 15
recommendations adopted by the County Board.
F. Provide right-of-way required for future roadway expansion adjacent to and
within the UMore property.
G. Design and construction of the internal roadway system within the UMore
development providing adequate service to each zone of development with turn
lanes and traffic control as needed for safe and efficient traffic flow.
H. Preparation of a Travel Demand Management (TDM) plan for the site, or
portions thereof, prior to the first large scale development proposal. This would
include, but is not limited to, action items for: transit (both bus and rail), non-
motorized, and new technologies.
I. Preparation of an Access Management Plan for the affected arterial and
collector roadways prior to the first development proposal.
Final Alternative Urban Areawide Review Update Page 13
UMore Study Area
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No. 12383-000
8. Noise Mitigation Plan
A. Site plans for future developments should include measures such as appropriate
setback distances, earthen berms, noise walls, and appropriate site design (such
as outdoor activity areas being developed away from major noise sources). Each
of these items should be considered on a case-by-case basis. The site plans
developed for specific projects should show the proposed locations and types of
mitigation, with the estimated noise reductions for all areas projected to exceed
noise standards.
9. Nearby Resources Mitigation Plan
A. Currently, UMore Park is not receiving federal funding or permitting. Should
federal funding or permitting be required in the future, the project:
• Must comply with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of
1966 (Section 106);
• The lead federal agency will be required to initiate consultation with
applicable Native American Tribes; and
• Additional architectural surveys may be required.
B. Erosion control measures will be required during construction to control the
loss of Waukegan soils and other soil types susceptible to erosion. All disturbed
areas will be required to be re-seeded and mulched as needed.
C. As appropriate, site and building plans will reflect and enhance any significant
views of natural features.
D. Park dedication will be in conformance to the codes and requirements of the
City of Rosemount and Empire Township.
10. Visual Impact Mitigation Plan
A. Through the development review process, the City will require appropriate
screening of development in the study area to control adverse visual impacts.
11. Compatibility with Land Use Regulations Mitigation Plan
A. If the AUAR area develops as shown in Scenarios 1, 2 or 3, changes will be
needed to the City of Rosemount’s Comprehensive Plan, Empire Township’s
Comprehensive Plan, the Metropolitan Council’s 2030 Regional Development
Framework, and both the City’s and Township’s zoning ordinances through the
respective amendment processes.
Update: The City has submitted a Comp Plan update to reflect revisions that are
generally consistent with Scenario 3. The City is also updating its
Comprehensive Plan. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan will reflect land uses
analyzed in this AUAR.
Final Alternative Urban Areawide Review Update Page 14
UMore Study Area
City of Rosemount, MN
WSB Project No. 12383-000
B. While no impacts to floodplain are anticipated, if impacts occur, mitigation in
conformance with Empire Township regulations will required.
VI. AUAR Update Review
Pursuant to Minnesota Rules 4410.3610 Subp. 7, this AUAR Update has followed the
appropriate review and comment process. The AUAR will remain valid for an
additional five years from the adoption date.
Appendix A – Figures
Long LakeDickey's LakeOronoLong Lake
Wayzata
Lakeof theWoods
Kittson Roseau
Koochiching
Marshall
St. Louis
Beltrami
Polk
Pennington
Cook
Lake
Red Lake
Itasca
Norman
Cass
Hubbard
Clay Becker
AitkinCrowWing
Carlton
Otter TailWilkin
PineTodd
Morrison
MilleLacsGrantDouglas
Traverse BentonStevensStearnsPope Isanti
Swift
Wright Anoka
MeekerLac QuiParle HennepinChippewa
McLeod Carv erYellow Medicine
DakotaRenvilleScottSibley
Redwood GoodhueLyonLeSueurRiceBrownNicollet Wabasha
BlueEarthMurray WinonaSteeleOlmsted
Rock Nobles Jackson Martin Faribault FillmoreFreebornMower
1 inch = 60 miles Document Path: K:\012383-000\GIS\Maps\Figure1_GeneralLocationMap.mxd Date Saved: 8/6/2018 5:04:24 PM0 60Miles¯
Rosemount/Empire Township, Dakota County
Project Location
?§A@ ?ØA@
)pApple ValleyLakevilleRosemount
Empire Twp
Vermillion Twp
Coates
Dakota County
UMore Area AUAR UpdateCity of Rosemount
Figure 1 - General Location Map
1 inch = 3,000 f eet Document Path: K:\012383-000\GIS\Maps\Figure2_USGSTopographicMap.mxd Date Saved: 8/6/2018 5:02:45 PMProje ct Area
0 3,000Feet¯UMore Area AUAR UpdateCity of Rosemount
Figure 2 - USGS Topographic Map
Robert Trl SCanada Ave WBloomfieldPa th
145th St E
A utum nPathCoa
t
e
s
Bl
v
d
C o n n e m a r a Trl
166th St E
152nd St E
1 6 0 t h St E160th St W
170th St E170th St W
Annette Ave145th St W Conley
AveBrazil Ave140th St E
Akron AveClayton AveBiscayne AveBiscayne AveAudrey AveBlaine Ave EBarbara AveClayton AveS
tatio
nTr l
?§A@
?§A@
G±WX
SÐ
SÈ
)p
G¸WX
Erickson Park
Biscayne Park
CarrollsWoodsPark
Kidder Park
ChippendalePark
Camfield Park
RosemountSchool Park
WindsPark
SchwarzPond Park
1 inch = 3,000 f eet Document Path: K:\012383-000\GIS\Maps\Figure3_AerialPhoto.mxd Date Saved: 8/6/2018 5:04:47 PMUMore Area AUAR UpdateCity of Rosemount
Railroads
Proje ct Area
Figure 3 - Aerial Photo 0 3,000Feet¯
Robert Trl SCanada Ave WBloomfieldPa th
145th St E
A utum nPathCoa
t
e
s
Bl
v
d
C o n n e m a r a Trl
166th St E
152nd St E
1 6 0 t h St E160th St W
170th St E170th St W
Annette Ave145th St W Conley
AveBrazil Ave140th St E
Akron AveClayton AveBiscayne AveBiscayne AveAudrey AveBlaine Ave EBarbara AveClayton AveS
tatio
nTr l
?§A@
?§A@
G±WX
SÐ
SÈ
)p
G¸WX
Erickson Park
Biscayne Park
CarrollsWoodsPark
Kidder Park
ChippendalePark
Camfield Park
RosemountSchool Park
WindsPark
SchwarzPond Park
1 inch = 3,000 f eet Document Path: K:\012383-000\GIS\Maps\Figure4_Scenario1.mxd Date Saved: 8/9/2018 7:53:48 AMUMore Area AUAR UpdateCity of Rosemount
Project Area
Low Density Residential
Low-Med D ensityResidential
Medium DensityResidential
High Density Residential
Neighborhood Center
Village Center
Community Center
Regional Center
Business Park
Industrial
Open Space
Open Water
Railroads
Principal Arterial
Minor Arterial
Major Collector
Minor Collector
Figure 4 - Scenario 1 0 3,000Feet¯
Robert Trl SCanada Ave WBloomfieldPa th
145th St E
A utum nPathCoa
t
e
s
Bl
v
d
C o n n e m a r a Trl
166th St E
152nd St E
1 6 0 t h St E160th St W
170th St E170th St W
Annette Ave145th St W Conley
AveBrazil Ave140th St E
Akron AveClayton AveBiscayne AveBiscayne AveAudrey AveBlaine Ave EBarbara AveClayton AveS
tatio
nTr l
?§A@
?§A@
G±WX
SÐ
SÈ
)p
G¸WX
Erickson Park
Biscayne Park
CarrollsWoodsPark
Kidder Park
ChippendalePark
Camfield Park
RosemountSchool Park
WindsPark
SchwarzPond Park
1 inch = 3,000 f eet Document Path: K:\012383-000\GIS\Maps\Figure5_Scenario2.mxd Date Saved: 8/9/2018 8:43:47 AMUMore Area AUAR UpdateCity of Rosemount
Project Area
Low Density Residential
Low-Med D ensityResidential
Medium DensityResidential
High Density Residential
Neighborhood Center
Village Center
Community Center
Regional Center
Business Park
Industrial
Open Space
Open Water
Railroads
Principal Arterial
Minor Arterial
Major Collector
Minor Collector
Figure 5 - Scenario 2 0 3,000Feet¯
Robert Trl SCanada Ave WBloomfieldPa th
145th St E
A utum nPathCoa
t
e
s
Bl
v
d
C o n n e m a r a Trl
166th St E
152nd St E
1 6 0 t h St E160th St W
170th St E170th St W
Annette Ave145th St W Conley
AveBrazil Ave140th St E
Akron AveClayton AveBiscayne AveBiscayne AveAudrey AveBlaine Ave EBarbara AveClayton AveS
tatio
nTr l
?§A@
?§A@
G±WX
SÐ
SÈ
)p
G¸WX
Erickson Park
Biscayne Park
CarrollsWoodsPark
Kidder Park
ChippendalePark
Camfield Park
RosemountSchool Park
WindsPark
SchwarzPond Park
1 inch = 3,000 f eet Document Path: K:\012383-000\GIS\Maps\Figure6_Scenario3.mxd Date Saved: 8/9/2018 7:54:07 AMUMore Area AUAR UpdateCity of Rosemount
Project Area
Low Density Residential
Low-Med D ensityResidential
Medium DensityResidential
High Density Residential
Neighborhood Center
Village Center
Community Center
Regional Center
Business Park
Industrial
Open Space
Open Water
Railroads
Principal Arterial
Minor Arterial
Major Collector
Minor Collector
Figure 6 - Scenario 3 0 3,000Feet¯
Robert Trl SCanada Ave WBloomfieldPa th
145th St E
A utum nPathCoa
t
e
s
Bl
v
d
C o n n e m a r a Trl
166th St E
152nd St E
1 6 0 t h St E160th St W
170th St E170th St W
Annette Ave145th St W Conley
AveBrazil Ave140th St E
Akron AveClayton AveBiscayne AveBiscayne AveAudrey AveBlaine Ave EBarbara AveClayton AveS
tatio
nTr l
?§A@
?§A@
G±WX
SÐ
SÈ
)p
G¸WX
Agricultural Research(Rosemount 2030 Comp Plan)
Public Park, Recreation and Open Space(Empire Township 2030 Future Land Use)
University of Minnesota (UMore)Empire Township 2030 Future Land Use
Erickson Park
Biscayne Park
CarrollsWoodsPark
Kidder Park
ChippendalePark
Camfield Park
RosemountSchool Park
WindsPark
SchwarzPond Park
1 inch = 3,000 f eet Document Path: K:\012383-000\GIS\Maps\Figure7_Scenario4.mxd Date Saved: 8/7/2018 10:09:38 AMUMore Area AUAR UpdateCity of Rosemount
Project Area
Railroads
Figure 7 - Scenario 4 0 3,000Feet¯
Robert Trl SCanada Ave WBloomfieldPa th
145th St E
A utum nPathCoa
t
e
s
Bl
v
d
C o n n e m a r a Trl
166th St E
152nd St E
1 6 0 t h St E160th St W
170th St E170th St W
Annette Ave145th St W Conley
AveBrazil Ave140th St E
Akron AveClayton AveBiscayne AveBiscayne AveAudrey AveBlaine Ave EBarbara AveClayton AveS
tatio
nTr l
?§A@
?§A@
G±WX
SÐ
SÈ
)p
G¸WX
Erickson Park
Biscayne Park
CarrollsWoodsPark
Kidder Park
ChippendalePark
Camfield Park
RosemountSchool Park
WindsPark
SchwarzPond Park
1 inch = 3,000 f eet Document Path: K:\012383-000\GIS\Maps\Figure8_TransitionToScenario3.mxd Date Saved: 8/10/2018 6:56:58 AMUMore Area AUAR UpdateCity of Rosemount
Figure 8 - Transition to Scenario 3 0 3,000Feet¯
Project Area
Railroads
AG - Agriculture
AGR - AgriculturalResearch
BP - Business Park
CC - CommunityCommercial
LDR - Low DensityResidential
MDR - Medium DensityResidential
HDR - High DensityResidential
PI - Public/Institutional
PO - Existing Parks/OpenSpace
UMORE - University ofMinnesota
WLDLF - WildlifeManagement Area
Principal Arterial
Minor Arterial
Major Collector
Minor Collector
Robert Trl SCanada Ave WBloomfieldPa th
145th St E
A utum nPathCoa
t
e
s
Bl
v
d
C o n n e m a r a Trl
166th St E
152nd St E
1 6 0 t h St E160th St W
170th St E170th St W
Annette Ave145th St W Conley
AveBrazil Ave140th St E
Akron AveClayton AveBiscayne AveBiscayne AveAudrey AveBlaine Ave EBarbara AveClayton AveS
tatio
nTr l
?§A@
?§A@
G±WX
SÐ
SÈ
)p
G¸WX
Erickson Park
Biscayne Park
CarrollsWoodsPark
Kidder Park
ChippendalePark
Camfield Park
RosemountSchool Park
WindsPark
SchwarzPond Park
1 inch = 3,000 f eet Document Path: K:\012383-000\GIS\Maps\Figure9_TrailsMap.mxd Date Saved: 8/15/2018 10:32:33 AMUMore Area AUAR UpdateCity of Rosemount
Railroads
Project Area
Off Street Trail
Programmed Off StreetTrail
Planned Off Street Trail
Street Adjacent Trail
Planned Street AdjacentTrail
Bike Lane
Planned Bike Lane
Sidewalk
Planned Sidewalk
Bicycle Blvd/Route
PlannedBlvd/Route/Sharrow
Unpaved Trail
Crossing
Crosswalk
Vermillion HighlandsGreenway
Figure 9 - Trails Map 0 3,000Feet¯
)B
)B
)B
)B
)B )B
)B)B
?§A@
?§A@
G±WX
SÐ
SÈ
)p
G¸WX
LakevilleEmpire Township
Rosemount
Empire TownshipRosemountApple ValleyCoates
Well 15
Well 14
Well RR2
Well RR1
Well 12
Well 7
Well 9
Well 8
1 inch = 4,000 f eet Document Path: K:\012383-000\GIS\Maps\Figure10_WellheadProtectionAreas.mxd Date Saved: 8/14/2018 9:56:08 AMUMore Area AUAR UpdateCity of Rosemount
Project Area
Railroads
)B Rosemount SupplyWell
Composite 1-YearCapture Zones
Wellhead ProtectionArea (WHPA)
Drinking W aterSupplyManagement Area(DWSMA)
City Boundaries
Figure 10 - Wellhead Protection Areas 0 4,000Feet¯
Appendix B – DNR Natural Heritage Database Review
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
(http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/waters/watermgmt_section/pwpermits/gp_2004_0001_manual.html)
Best Practices for Meeting DNR GP 2004-0001 (version 4, October 2014) Chapter 1, Page 25
Preventing Entanglement
by Erosion Control Blanket
Plastic mesh netting is a common component in erosion control blanket. It is utilized to hold loose fibrous materials in
place (EG straw) until vegetation is established. Erosion control blanket is being utilized extensively and is effective for
reducing soil erosion, benefitting both soil health and water quality. Unfortunately there is a negative aspect of the plastic
mesh component: It is increasingly being documented that its interaction with reptiles and amphibians can be fatal
(Barton and Kinkead, 2005; Kapfer and Paloski, 2011). Mowing machinery is also susceptible to damage due to the long
lasting plastic mesh.
Potential Problems:
x Plastic netting remains a hazard long after other components have decomposed.
x Plastic mesh netting can result in entanglement and death of a variety of small animals. The most vulnerable
group of animals are the reptiles and amphibians (snakes, frogs, toads, salamanders, turtles). Ducklings, small
mammals, and fish have also been observed entangled in the netting.
x Road maintenance machinery can snag the plastic mesh and pull up long lengths into machinery, thus binding up
machinery and causing damage and/or loss of time cleaning it out.
Suggested Alternatives:
x Do not use in known locations of reptiles or amphibians that are listed as Threatened or Endangered species.
x Limit use of blanket containing welded plastic mesh to areas away from where reptiles or amphibians are likely
(near wetlands, lakes, watercourses, or rock outcrops) or habitat transition zones (prairie – woodland edges,
rocky outcrop – woodland edges, steep rocky slopes, etc.)
x Select products with biodegradable netting (preferably made from natural fibers, though varieties of biodegradable
polyesters also exist on the market). Biodegradable products will degrade under a variety of moisture and light
conditions.
x DO NOT use products that require UV-light to degrade (also called “photodegradable”) as they do not degrade
properly when shaded by vegetation.
Solution: Most categories of erosion control blanket and sediment control logs are available in natural net options.
x Specify ‘Natural Netting’ for rolled erosion control products, per MnDOT Spec 3885. See Table 3885-1.
x Specify ‘Natural Netting’ for sediment control logs, per MnDOT Spec 3897
The plastic mesh component of erosion control blanket becomes a net for entrapment.
Literature Referenced
Barton, C. and K. Kinkead. 2005. Do erosion control and snakes mesh? Soil and Water Conservation Society 60:33A-35A.
Kapfer, J.M., and R.A. Paloski. 2011. On the threat to snakes of mesh deployed for erosion control and wildlife exclusion.
Herpetological Conservation and Biology 6:1-9.
Environmental Review Fact Sheet Series
Endangered, Threatened, and Special Concern Species of Minnesota
Blanding’s Turtle
(Emydoidea blandingii)
Minnesota Status: Threatened State Rank1: S2
Federal Status: none Global Rank1: G4
HABITAT USE
Blanding’s turtles need both wetland and upland habitats to complete their life cycle. The types of wetlands used
include ponds, marshes, shrub swamps, bogs, and ditches and streams with slow-moving water. In Minnesota,
Blanding’s turtles are primarily marsh and pond inhabitants. Calm, shallow water bodies (Type 1-3 wetlands) with
mud bottoms and abundant aquatic vegetation (e.g., cattails, water lilies) are preferred, and extensive marshes
bordering rivers provide excellent habitat. Small temporary wetlands (those that dry up in the late summer or fall)
are frequently used in spring and summer -- these fishless pools are amphibian and invertebrate breeding habitat,
which provides an important food source for Blanding’s turtles. Also, the warmer water of these shallower areas
probably aids in the development of eggs within the female turtle. Nesting occurs in open (grassy or brushy) sandy
uplands, often some distance from water bodies. Frequently, nesting occurs in traditional nesting grounds on
undeveloped land. Blanding’s turtles have also been known to nest successfully on residential property (especially
in low density housing situations), and to utilize disturbed areas such as farm fields, gardens, under power lines, and
road shoulders (especially of dirt roads). Although Blanding’s turtles may travel through woodlots during their
seasonal movements, shady areas (including forests and lawns with shade trees) are not used for nesting. Wetlands
with deeper water are needed in times of drought, and during the winter. Blanding’s turtles overwinter in the muddy
bottoms of deeper marshes and ponds, or other water bodies where they are protected from freezing.
LIFE HISTORY
Individuals emerge from overwintering and begin basking in late March or early April on warm, sunny days. The
increase in body temperature which occurs during basking is necessary for egg development within the female turtle.
Nesting in Minnesota typically occurs during June, and females are most active in late afternoon and at dusk.
Nesting can occur as much as a mile from wetlands. The nest is dug by the female in an open sandy area and 6-15
eggs are laid. The female turtle returns to the marsh within 24 hours of laying eggs. After a development period of
approximately two months, hatchlings leave the nest from mid-August through early-October. Nesting females and
hatchlings are often at risk of being killed while crossing roads between wetlands and nesting areas. In addition to
movements associated with nesting, all ages and both sexes move between wetlands from April through November.
These movements peak in June and July and again in September and October as turtles move to and from
overwintering sites. In late autumn (typically November), Blanding’s turtles bury themselves in the substrate (the
mud at the bottom) of deeper wetlands to overwinter.
IMPACTS / THREATS / CAUSES OF DECLINE
• loss of wetland habitat through drainage or flooding (converting wetlands into ponds or lakes)
• loss of upland habitat through development or conversion to agriculture
• human disturbance, including collection for the pet trade* and road kills during seasonal movements
• increase in predator populations (skunks, raccoons, etc.) which prey on nests and young
*It is illegal to possess this threatened species.
Minnesota DNR Division of Ecological Resources Environmental Review Fact Sheet Series. Blanding’s Turtle.
2
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AVOIDING AND MINIMIZING IMPACTS
These recommendations apply to typical construction projects and general land use within Blanding’s turtle habitat,
and are provided to help local governments, developers, contractors, and homeowners minimize or avoid detrimental
impacts to Blanding’s turtle populations. List 1 describes minimum measures which we recommend to prevent harm
to Blanding’s turtles during construction or other work within Blanding’s turtle habitat. List 2 contains
recommendations which offer even greater protection for Blanding’s turtles populations; this list should be used in
addition to the first list in areas which are known to be of state-wide importance to Blanding’s turtles (contact the
DNR’s Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program if you wish to determine if your project or home is in one
of these areas), or in any other area where greater protection for Blanding’s turtles is desired.
List 1. Recommendations for all areas inhabited by
Blanding’s turtles.
List 2. Additional recommendations for areas known to
be of state-wide importance to Blanding’s turtles.
GENERAL
A flyer with an illustration of a Blanding’s turtle 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.
Turtle crossing signs can be installed adjacent to road-crossing areas used by Blanding’s turtles to increase public awareness and reduce road kills.
Turtles which are in imminent danger should be moved, by hand, out of harms way. Turtles which are not in
imminent danger should be left undisturbed.
Workers in the area should be aware that Blanding’s
turtles nest in June, generally after 4pm, and should be advised to minimize disturbance if turtles are seen.
If a Blanding’s turtle nests in your yard, do not disturb the nest.
If you would like to provide more protection for a Blanding’s turtle nest on your property, see “Protecting Blanding’s Turtle Nests” on page 3 of this fact sheet.
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.
Construction in potential nesting areas should be limited to the period between September 15 and June 1 (this is the time when activity of adults and hatchlings in upland areas
is at a minimum).
WETLANDS
Small, vegetated temporary wetlands (Types 2 & 3) should not be dredged, deepened, filled, or converted to storm water retention basins (these wetlands provide important habitat during spring and summer).
Shallow portions of wetlands should not be disturbed during prime basking time (mid morning to mid- afternoon in May and June). A wide buffer should be left along the shore to minimize human activity near wetlands (basking
Blanding’s turtles are more easily disturbed than other turtle species).
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.
Wetlands should be protected from road, lawn, and other
chemical run-off by a vegetated buffer strip at least 50'
wide. This area should be left unmowed and in a natural condition.
ROADS
Roads should be kept to minimum standards on widths and
lanes (this reduces road kills by slowing traffic and
reducing the distance turtles need to cross).
Tunnels should be considered in areas with concentrations
of turtle crossings (more than 10 turtles per year per 100
meters of road), and in areas of lower density if the level of road use would make a safe crossing impossible for turtles. Contact your DNR Regional Nongame Specialist
for further information on wildlife tunnels.
Roads should be ditched, not curbed or below grade. If curbs must be used, 4 inch high curbs at a 3:1 slope are
preferred (Blanding’s turtles have great difficulty climbing
traditional curbs; curbs and below grade roads trap turtles on the road and can cause road kills).
Roads should be ditched, not curbed or below grade.
Minnesota DNR Division of Ecological Resources Environmental Review Fact Sheet Series. Blanding’s Turtle.
3
ROADS cont.
Culverts between wetland areas, or between wetland areas
and nesting areas, should be 36 inches or greater in diameter, and elliptical or flat-bottomed.
Road placement should avoid separating wetlands from adjacent upland nesting sites, or these roads should be fenced to prevent turtles from attempting to cross them (contact your DNR Nongame Specialist for details).
Wetland crossings should be bridged, or include raised roadways with culverts which are 36 in or greater in diameter and flat-bottomed or elliptical (raised roadways
discourage turtles from leaving the wetland to bask on
roads).
Road placement should avoid bisecting wetlands, or these roads should be fenced to prevent turtles from attempting to cross them (contact your DNR Nongame Specialist for
details). This is especially important for roads with more
than 2 lanes.
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.
Roads crossing streams should be bridged.
UTILITIES
Utility access and maintenance roads should be kept to a minimum (this reduces road-kill potential).
Because trenches can trap turtles, trenches should be
checked for turtles prior to being backfilled and the sites should be returned to original grade.
LANDSCAPING AND VEGETATION MANAGEMENT
Terrain should be left with as much natural contour as possible.
As much natural landscape as possible should be preserved (installation of sod or wood chips, paving, and planting of
trees within nesting habitat can make that habitat unusable
to nesting Blanding’s turtles).
Graded areas should be revegetated with native grasses
and forbs (some non-natives form dense patches through
which it is difficult for turtles to travel).
Open space should include some areas at higher elevations
for nesting. These areas should be retained in native
vegetation, and should be connected to wetlands by a wide corridor of native vegetation.
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 1st ).
Ditches and utility access roads should not be mowed or managed through use of chemicals. If vegetation
management is required, it should be done mechanically, as infrequently as possible, and fall through spring
(mowing can kill turtles present during mowing, and makes it easier for predators to locate turtles crossing
roads).
Protecting Blanding’s Turtle Nests: Most predation on turtle nests occurs within 48 hours after the eggs are laid.
After this time, the scent is gone from the nest and it is more difficult for predators to locate the nest. Nests more
than a week old probably do not need additional protection, unless they are in a particularly vulnerable spot, such as
a yard where pets may disturb the nest. Turtle nests can be protected from predators and other disturbance by
covering them with a piece of wire fencing (such as chicken wire), secured to the ground with stakes or rocks. The
piece of fencing should measure at least 2 ft. x 2 ft., and should be of medium sized mesh (openings should be about
2 in. x 2 in.). It is very important that the fencing be removed before August 1st so the young turtles can escape
from the nest when they hatch!
REFERENCES
1Association for Biodiversity Information. “Heritage Status: Global, National, and Subnational Conservation
Status Ranks.” NatureServe. Version 1.3 (9 April 2001). http://www.natureserve.org/ranking.htm (15
April 2001).
Coffin, B., and L. Pfannmuller. 1988. Minnesota’s Endangered Flora and Fauna. University of Minnesota
Press, Minneapolis, 473 pp.
Minnesota DNR Division of Ecological Resources Environmental Review Fact Sheet Series. Blanding’s Turtle.
4
REFERENCES (cont.)
Moriarty, J. J., and M. Linck. 1994. Suggested guidelines for projects occurring in Blanding’s turtle habitat.
Unpublished report to the Minnesota DNR. 8 pp.
Oldfield, B., and J. J. Moriarty. 1994. Amphibians and Reptiles Native to Minnesota. University of Minnesota
Press, Minneapolis, 237 pp.
Sajwaj, T. D., and J. W. Lang. 2000. Thermal ecology of Blanding’s turtle in central Minnesota. Chelonian
Conservation and Biology 3(4):626-636.
Compiled by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Division of Ecological Resources, Updated March 2008
Endangered Species Environmental Review Coordinator, 500 Lafayette Rd., Box 25, St. Paul, MN 55155 / 651-259-5109
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 1st).
Compiled by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Division of Ecological and Water Resources, Updated August 2012
Endangered Species Review Coordinator, 500 Lafayette Rd., Box 25, St. Paul, MN 55155 / 651-259-5109
Appendix C – Comments and Responses to the AUAR Update
701 Xenia Avenue South | Suite 300 | Minneapolis, MN 55416 | (763) 541-4800
Building a legacy – your legacy.
Equal Opportunity Employer | wsbeng.com
K:\012383-000\Admin\Docs\012383-000 MEMO - commentresponse100818.docx
Memorandum
To: Cameron Muhic, MnDOT
Karen Kromar, MPCA
Erin Stwora, Dakota County
Copy: Kim Lindquist, City of Rosemount
From: Andi Moffatt, WSB
Date: October 8, 2018
Re: UMore Study Area AUAR Update – Responses to Comments
WSB Project No. 12383-000
The City of Rosemount received comments from the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT),
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), and Dakota County regarding the UMore Study Area AUAR
Update. The comment period ended on October 1, 2018. Comments are generally paraphrased below with
responses provided.
MnDOT
MnDOT indicated they did not have any comments.
MPCA
Comment 1: Projects that disturb more than 50 acres and discharge within one mile of a special or
impaired water will require the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) be submitted
to MPCA for a 30-day review.
Response: The AUAR notes the NPDES permit will be required and project proposers will
need to meet local, state, and federal permit requirements. No change to the AUAR is
needed.
Comment 2: Low Impact Design (LID) is a design practice to minimize stormwater impacts. MPCA
advocates the use of these practices.
Response: Within the City of Rosemount, the city’s stormwater management regulations
apply. Within Empire Township, the Vermillion River Watershed Joint Powers Organization’s
(VRWJPO) regulations apply. Infiltration is a practice that is required in these areas. To meet
this requirement and to accommodate stormwater, LID practices may be used as part of
development. This comment will be taken into consideration as development projects are
proposed. No change to the AUAR is needed.
Dakota County
Comment 1: The proposed land use scenarios contemplate residential uses around the former Gopher
Ordnance Works (GOW), which has known contamination. Reference to the GOW Remedial
Investigation website should be included in the AUAR.
Response: The original 2013 AUAR references this website, the GOW site, and several of
the studies completed at the GOW in Section 9 – Land Use. No change to the AUAR is
needed.
October 8, 2018
Page 2
K:\012383-000\Admin\Docs\012383-000 MEMO - commentresponse100818.docx
Comment 2: The AUAR does not appear to evaluate either the results of the former GOW Remedial
Investigation information as it relates to proposed development and the proposed new lake.
These should be considered and appropriate mitigation responses included.
Response: The original AUAR contains extensive information about and reference to the
GOW and the contamination that exists on the site. Prior to development oc curring in a
contaminated area, areas will either need to be avoided or cleaned to meet MPCA standards
for that type of land use. Through development review, permitting, and MPCA standards,
development would only be allowed in areas that meet MPCA standards for that type of land
use.
Comment 3: Dakota County has a well inventory available for reference related to unsealed and
abandoned wells
Response: The AUAR references the County Well Index. As development occurs, the city
and township will take under advisement the Dakota County well inventory as well.
Comment 4: The County recently reconstructed the TH 52 and CSAH 42 interchange. The AUAR update
indicated that the system interchange was completed as part of the mitigation plan. The
mitigation is only partially addressed as it was not a full system interchange that was
constructed.
Response: This mitigation measure (7D) has been revised to correct this information.
Comment 5: Dakota County has recent sightings of Blanding’s turtles within ¾ mile of the project area.
Response: Comment noted. The information from the DNR also indicates sightings of
Blanding’s turtles and the fact sheet has been included in the AUAR Update.
This concludes the responses to comments on the AUAR Update. If you have questions, please contact me at
763-287-7196 or amoffatt@wsbeng.com
701 Xenia Avenue South | Suite 300 | Minneapolis, MN 55416 | (763) 541-4800
Building a legacy – your legacy.
Equal Opportunity Employer | wsbeng.com
G:\2018\AUAR UMore Update\012383-000 MEMO - commentresponse100818.docx
Memorandum
To: Cameron Muhic, MnDOT
Karen Kromar, MPCA
Erin Stwora, Dakota County
Copy: Kim Lindquist, City of Rosemount
From: Andi Moffatt, WSB
Date: October 8, 2018
Re: UMore Study Area AUAR Update – Responses to Comments
WSB Project No. 12383-000
The City of Rosemount received comments from the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT),
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), and Dakota County regarding the UMore Study Area AUAR
Update. The comment period ended on October 1, 2018. Comments are generally paraphrased below with
responses provided.
MnDOT
MnDOT indicated they did not have any comments.
MPCA
Comment 1: Projects that disturb more than 50 acres and discharge within one mile of a special or
impaired water will require the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) be submitted
to MPCA for a 30-day review.
Response: The AUAR notes the NPDES permit will be required and project proposers will
need to meet local, state, and federal permit requirements. No change to the AUAR is
needed.
Comment 2: Low Impact Design (LID) is a design practice to minimize stormwater impacts. MPCA
advocates the use of these practices.
Response: Within the City of Rosemount, the city’s stormwater management regulations
apply. Within Empire Township, the Vermillion River Watershed Joint Powers Organization’s
(VRWJPO) regulations apply. Infiltration is a practice that is required in these areas. To meet
this requirement and to accommodate stormwater, LID practices may be used as part of
development. This comment will be taken into consideration as development projects are
proposed. No change to the AUAR is needed.
Dakota County
Comment 1: The proposed land use scenarios contemplate residential uses around the former Gopher
Ordnance Works (GOW), which has known contamination. Reference to the GOW Remedial
Investigation website should be included in the AUAR.
Response: The original 2013 AUAR references this website, the GOW site, and several of
the studies completed at the GOW in Section 9 – Land Use. No change to the AUAR is
needed.
October 8, 2018
Page 2
G:\2018\AUAR UMore Update\012383-000 MEMO - commentresponse100818.docx
Comment 2: The AUAR does not appear to evaluate either the results of the former GOW Remedial
Investigation information as it relates to proposed development and the proposed new lake.
These should be considered and appropriate mitigation responses included.
Response: The original AUAR contains extensive information about and reference to the
GOW and the contamination that exists on the site. Prior to development occurring in a
contaminated area, areas will either need to be avoided or cleaned to meet MPCA standards
for that type of land use. Through development review, permitting, and MPCA standards,
development would only be allowed in areas that meet MPCA standards for that type of land
use.
Comment 3: Dakota County has a well inventory available for reference related to unsealed and
abandoned wells
Response: The AUAR references the County Well Index. As development occurs, the city
and township will take under advisement the Dakota County well inventory as well.
Comment 4: The County recently reconstructed the TH 52 and CSAH 42 interchange. The AUAR update
indicated that the system interchange was completed as part of the mitigation plan. The
mitigation is only partially addressed as it was not a full system interchange that was
constructed.
Response: This mitigation measure (7D) has been revised to correct this information.
Comment 5: Dakota County has recent sightings of Blanding’s turtles within ¾ mile of the project area.
Response: Comment noted. The information from the DNR also indicates sightings of
Blanding’s turtles and the fact sheet has been included in the AUAR Update.
This concludes the responses to comments on the AUAR Update. If you have questions, please contact me at
763-287-7196 or amoffatt@wsbeng.com