Information for File # MVP MMJ; Elim Care

Transcription

1 Information for File # MVP MMJ; Elim Care Applicant: Elim Care of Maple Plain Corps Contact: Melissa Jenny Address: 18 Fifth Street East, Suite 7, St. Paul, MN Melissa.m.jenny@usace.army.mil Phone: (651) Primary County: Hennepin Location: NE ¼ of the NE ¼ of Section 25, Township 118 North, Range 2 West; 125 Baker Park Road, Maple Plain, MN Information Complete On: July 2, 218 Posting Expires On: August 2, 218 Authorization Type: LOP-5-MN This application is being reviewed in accordance with the practices for documenting Corps jurisdiction under Sections 9 & 1 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 18 and Section of the Clean Water Act identified in Regulatory Guidance Letter Project PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND PURPOSE: Elim Care proposes to develop 7.53 acres in the City of Maple Plain to provide new state-of-the-art mini-continuum Senior Care Facility. Through a partnership with the City of Maple Plain, the project includes 3.51 acres of municipal right-ofway to provide the proposed Gateway Boulevard transit corridor, transit stops, bus circulation, public parking, and stormwater features. These facilities would replace a 1.98-acre Metro Transit park and ride lot that exists at the proposed location of the Elim Care building. The proposal to redevelop the transit facility is supported by the City of Maple Plain, Metro Transit, and Hennepin County. The layout necessary to provide the Elim Care facility and the Gateway Boulevard transit corridor involves 8.7 acres of additional land that will be platted as four separate lots, bringing the total project area to acres. The purpose of the Elim Care senior facility is to provide a new state-of-the-art mini-continuum care facility for seniors in the Maple Plain. A secondary purpose is to coordinate the senior facility with nearby public stormwater and transit facilitates. NAME, AREA AND TYPES OF WATERS (INCLUDING WETLANDS) SUBJECT TO LOSS: The project would result in the permanent discharge of fill material into 1.5 acres of wetland within four separate wetlands on the property. However, two of the wetlands proposed to be impacted (Wetlands 1 & 3 =.28 acre of impact associated with the construction of Gateway Boulevard) are believed to be isolated may fall outside the jurisdiction of the Corps. If Wetlands 1 & 3 are determined to be isolated, the project would result in the permanent discharge of fill material into.77 acre of Corps jurisdictional wetland. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED: The applicant stated the following in their application: The proposed wetland impacts are unavoidable due to the need for a functional, cohesive project design, a safe and efficient transit facility, management of runoff, and redevelopment of the Gateway District in a manner consistent with land use guidance and accepted engineering standards and practices. The project has been designed to minimize wetland impacts to the extent practicable by avoiding alternative sites with larger and higher quality wetlands. The Applicant considered three other sites within the City of Maple Plain for this project, in addition Page 1 of 2

2 to the proposed site, but determined that these alternate sites were not practicable due to increased wetland impacts, and potential adverse impacts to historic properties and existing businesses. The Applicant also considered a no-build alternative as a method to avoid wetland impacts associated with the project. Although the no-build alternative would avoid wetland impacts, it would not fulfill the project purpose, need, goals, or requirements. The no-build alternative is not consistent with the City of Maple Plain Comprehensive Plan, which guides the project area for Mixed Use development. Nor is it consistent with the Metropolitan Council s 23 Regional Development Framework, which: (1) targets higher density in locations with convenient access to transportation corridors and adequate sewer capacity, and (2) favors efficient and economical use of regional infrastructure. Consideration was also given to a wetland avoidance design that would completely avoid wetland impacts. However, the wetland avoidance design is not practicable because it would not fulfill the project purpose, need, goals and requirements. The wetland avoidance design would avoid all wetlands by shifting the proposed alignment of Gateway Boulevard south of Wetland 3 and including a bridge crossing over the ditch that is the southern end of Wetland 2. This alignment of Gateway Boulevard would be parallel to and only about 55 feet from the State Highway 12, resulting in inefficient land use and unsafe intersections at both ends of Gateway Boulevard, where it meets Howard Avenue Baker Park Road. The wetland avoidance design was rejected because it is inconsistent with Hennepin County Access Spacing Guidelines and the Metropolitan Council 23 Park-and-Ride Plan. In regard to wetland impact minimization: The proposed project would impact all wetlands on the development site. Nevertheless, the proposed alternative minimizes wetland impacts by: 1. Locating the project on this disturbed/degraded site rather than on an alternative site, two of which include wetlands that are less disturbed and higher functioning. 2. Providing staged senior housing and care in one three-story building with underground parking to create a compact project design that uses space efficiently and minimizes the overall project footprint. 3. Treating stormwater from impervious surfaces to remove sediment and nutrients prior to discharge to wetlands and ditches.. Using silt fence and other Best Management Practices to control erosion and stormwater runoff during construction. The Applicant indicated in their application that the need for a feasible and prudent design that is consistent with local ordinances, land use practices, and engineering standards causes further wetland impact minimization to be impracticable. COMPENSATORY MITIGATION: The Applicant has proposed to compensate for unavoidable wetland impacts associated with this project, at a 2:1 ratio, via purchase of wetland bank credits from a wetland mitigation bank in Bank Service Area (BSA) 7, which is the same watershed as the impact site. Drawings: See attached, labeled as MMJ, Elim Care Posting Figures 1-8 Page 2 of 2

3 MMJ; Elim Care Posting Figure 1 Site Location Baker Park Reserve 1,75 Figure 1 - Site Location and Project Search Area Project Area (19.78 ac) Elim Care Property (7.53 ac) Project Search Area City of Maple Plain OpenStreetMap (and) contributors, CC-BY-SA Elim Care (KES 218-1)

4 MMJ; Elim Care Posting Figure 2 Independence Alternative Site 3 Alternative Site 2 Maple Plain Baker Park Reserve Medina Proposed Site Alternative Site 1 Independence OpenStreetMap (and) contributors, CC-BY-SA Figure 2 - Alternative Site Locations 75 Alternative Site Project Area Elim Care Property Towns and Townships Elim Care (KES 218-1)

5 1 Apartments Wetland ac 988 Industrial Baker Park Reserve Wetland ac 8 8 MPFC Addition (Commercial) Park and Ride Wetland ac Commercial 6 98 Wetland.1 ac Residential Church Residential MMJ; Elim Care Posting Figure 3 Commercial 2 Commercial Figure 3 - Existing Conditions and Surrounding Land Use 25 Project Area (19.78 ac) Elim Care Property (7.53 ac) Wetland Boundary 2ft Lidar Contour Elim Care (KES 218-1)

6 MMJ; Elim Care Posting Figure WL WL2 Project Aera (19.78 ac) Elim Care Property (7.53 ac) Wetland Boundary Wetland Mgmt Classificatons Lake WL1 Manage 1 Manage 2 Manage 3 WL3 Not Classified Preserve Upland 2 Figure - MCWD Wetland Classifications Elim Care (KES 218-1)

7 MMJ; Elim Care Posting Figure 5 Figure 5 Project Layout Elim Care (KES 218-1) this figure are approximate and do not constitute an

8 MMJ; Elim Care Posting Figure 6 WL Impact:.1 acres ELIM CARE WL2 Impact:.5751 acres GATEWAY BOULEVARD WL1 Impact:.2297 acres GATEWAY BOULEVARD WL3 Impact:.537 acres Figure 6 - Proposed Grading Plan 125 Project Area (19.78 ac) Elim Care Property (7.53 ac) Wetland Boundary Wetland Impact Elim Care (KES 218-1)

9 MMJ; Elim Care Posting Figure 7 Retaining wall for wetland avoidance. WL WL2 End of street for wetland avoidance. WL3 Figure 7 - Previous Wetland Avoidance Design 125 End of Street Project Area Retaining Wall Wetland Boundary Stormpond Elim Care (KES 218-1)

10 MMJ; Elim Care Posting Figure 8 Retaining wall for wetland avoidance. WL WL2 GA TEW AY Realigned Gateway Boulevard woud sacrifice pubic safety because it would be only 6 feet from Hwy. 12. BO ULE WL1 VA RD WL3 GATEWAY BOULEVARD A bridge would be constructed for wetland avoidance. Figure 8 - Revised Wetland Avoidance Design 2 Project Area (19.78 ac) Wetland Boundary Elim Care Property (7.53 ac) Storm Pond Avoidance Alignment Elim Care Facility Retaining Wall Bridge Elim Care (KES 218-1)