The URL can be used to link to this page

9. EAW for County Road 17 (Powers Boulevard) Reconstruction from Trunk Highway 5 to Lyman BoulevardMemorandum B R W INC. Planning Transportation Engineering Urban Design Thresher Square 700 Third Street So. Minneapolis, MN 55415 612/370 -0700 Fax 612/370 -1378 Denver Milwaukee Minneapolis Orlando Phoenix Portland San Diego Seattle Donald W. Ringrose Richard P. Wolsfeld Thomas F. Carroll Craig A. Amundsen Donald E. Hunt John B. McNamara Richard D. Pilgrim Dale N. Beckmann Jeffery L. Benson Ralph C. Blum Gary J. Erickson John C. Lynch Paul N. Bay Sabri Ayaz Gary A. Ehret Anthony Heppelmann Arijs Pakalns Martha McPhee Howard P. Preston Dennis P. Probst DATE: July 29, 1994 TO: Minnesota Environmental Assessment Worksheet Distribution List FROM: Jeanne Witzig RE: CSAH 17 Reconstruction EAW On behalf of Carver County, BRW is distributing the enclosed Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the CSAH 17 Reconstruction Project in Chanhassen, Carver County. The proposed project limits are TH 5 to the north and Lyman Boulevard (CASH 18) to the south. Comments on the CSAH 17 EAW should be submitted directly to Mr. William Weckman, PE, at the following address: Carver County Public Works 600 East 4th Street BOX 6 Chaska, Minnesota 55318 The EAW comment period will close on August 31, 1994. JW /nr Enclosure cc: William Weckman, Carver County Jon Horn, BRW File 2396A01 i S 19 kr.. N EN, CITY OF Cg AUG 0 ►994 r CSAH 17 Reconstruction T.H. 5 to Lyman Boulevard (CR 18) Environmental Assessment Worksheet Prepared For; Carver County Prepared July 25, 1994 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW) NOTE TO PREPARERS This worksheet is to be completed by the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) or its agents. The project proposer must supply any reasonably accessible data necessary for the worksheet, but is not to complete the final worksheet itself. If a complete answer does not fit in the space allotted, attach additional sheets as necessary. For assistance with this worksheet contact the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB) at (612) 296 -8253 or (toll -free) 1- 800 - 652 -9747 (ask operator for the EQB environmental review program) or consult EAW Guidelines, a booklet available from the EQB. NOTE TO REVIEWERS Comments must be submitted to the RGU (See item 3.) during the 30 -day comment period following notice of the EAW in the EOB Monitor (Contact the RGU or the EQB to learn when the comment period ends.) Comments should address the accuracy and completeness of the information, potential impacts that may warrant further investigation, and the need for an EIS. If the EAW has been prepared for the scoping of an EIS (See item 4.), comments should address the accuracy and completeness of the information and suggest issues for investigation in the EIS. 1. Project Title: County Road 17 Reconstruction - TH 5 to Lyman Boulevard (CR 18) 2. Proposer: Carver County 3. RGU: Carver County Contact person: William Weckman, PE Address: Carver Countv Public Works 600 East 4th Street Box 6 Chaska, MN 55318 Phone: (612) 361 -1010 4. Reasons for EAW Preparation Contact person: William Weckman, 'PE and title: Assistant Countv Engineer Address: 600 East 4th Street Box 6 Chaska, MN 55318 Phone: (612) 361 -1010 EIS Scoping X Mandatory EAW _ Citizen Petition RGU Discretion _ Proposer Volunteered If EAW of EIS is mandatory give EQB rule category number(s) 4410, 4300, Subp. 22, Highway Projects #20737 5. Project Location 14 & 23 1/4 Section 116N Township 23W Range County: Carver City /Twp: Chanhassen Attach copies of each of the following to the EAW: a. a county map showing the general location of the project; b. copy(ies) of USGS 7.5 minute, 1:24,000 scale map (photocopy is OK) indicating the project boundaries; c. a site plan showing all significant project and natural features. 6. Description. Give a complete description of the proposed project and ancillary facilities (attach additional sheets as necessary). Emphasize construction and operation methods and features that will cause physical manipulation of the environment or produce wastes. Indicate the timing and duration of construction activities. The project consists of the reconstruction and widening of approximately 7,500 linear feet of County Road 17 between Trunk Highway 5 and Lyman Boulevard (CSAH 18) and 400 feet of Lake Drive, east of County Road 17. County Road 17 is proposed to be a four lane divided bituminous roadway with curb and gutter. Two fourteen -foot traffic lanes will be provided in each direction with turn lanes at intersecting roadways. Lake Drive is proposed to be a 36 -foot bituminous roadway with curb and gutter. The project will include the installation of storm sewer, street lighting, landscaping and bituminous pathway along County Road 17 and storm sewer, street lighting, and landscaping along Lake Drive. The proposed alignment will be constructed completely within the existing right -of -way for this road. Existing County Road 17 is a four lane divided roadway from Trunk Highway 5 to approximately 2,000 feet south. The remainder of the existing roadway to Lyman Boulevard is two lane undivided. In areas where existing County Road 17 is two lane, the existing roadbed is located on the west side of the right -of -way. A majority of the widening proposed would, therefore, occur to the east side of the existing roadway. County Road 17 does not currently meet State Aid Standards, therefore this project includes the necessary improvements to bring the roadway up to these standards. Development of areas adjacent to County Road 17 has significantly increased the volume of vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians utilizing the roadway. The proposed improvements will include additional traffic lanes and a separate path for bicycles and pedestrians which will result in safer environment for all users of the roadway. Based on the findings of the EAW, the County anticipates completing the surcharging operations, required for the project, by the end of 1994. Following the EAW/ surcharging phase, preliminary and final plans for the roadway and utility improvements will be prepared. Construction of the roadway will occur during the 1995 construction season. #20737 2 Provide a 50 or fewer word abstract for use in EOB Monitor notice: Carver County is the project proposer and Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) for the CSAH 17 project in Chanhassen, Carver County. The proposed action includes the widening and reconstruction of 7,500 linear feet of CSAH 17, from TH 5 to Lyman Boulevard (CSAH 18), and the construction of 400 linear feet of Lake Drive, east of CSAH 17. 7. Project Magnitude Data Total Project Area (acres): or Length (miles): 7,500 linear feet of CSAH 17, and 400 feet of Lake Drive east of CSAH 17 Number of Residential Units Unattached: Attached: Commercial /Industrial /Institutional Building Area (gross floor space) Total square feet; Indicate area of specific uses: Office: Manufacturing: _ Retail: Other Industrial: Warehouse: Institutional: _ Light Industrial: Agricultural: _ Other Commercial (specify): Building Heights(s): 8. Permits and Approvals Required. List all known local, state and federal permits, approvals and funding required: Unit of Government Type of Application Status U.S. Army Corps of Nationwide Permit To be submitted Engineers Minnesota Pollution NPDES Approval To be submitted Control Agency Minnesota Dept. of Protected Waters Permit To be submitted Natural Resources Minnesota Dept. of Plan Approval To be submitted Transportation #20737 3 Unit of Government Type of Application Status Riley- Purgatory -Bluff Grading Permit To be amended Creek Watershed District City of Chanhassen Carver County City of Chanhassen Wetlands Alteration Permit Replacement Plan Approval Plan Approval Plan Approval Submitted Submitted To be submitted To be submitted 9. Land Use. Describe current and recent past land use and development on the site and on adjacent lands. Discuss the compatibility of the project with adjacent and nearby land uses; indicate whether any potential conflicts involve environmental matters. Identify any potential environmental hazard due to past land uses, such as soil contamination or abandoned storage tanks. The land within and around the proposed project area is mostly residential subdivisions with some areas of wetland, lakes, and other open spaces such as Lake Susan Park. Light Industrial development is common to the north of the proposed project. Downtown Chanhassen is within one mile north of the project area. Nearly all of the land directly adjacent to the boundary of the proposed project south of Lake Drive is developed residential or zoned for residential development, with the exception of some wetland and utility easement areas. The area north of Lake Drive is zoned as industrial office park (IOP). The area to the south of Lake Drive is zoned as a Planned Unit Development District (PUD) - Residential. There is currently an 18 -inch watermain that follows County Road 17 along the west right -of -way lane. This 18 -inch watermain crosses the roadway at the intersection of County Road 17 and Lake Drive, and runs approximately 1,500 feet east and south to City Well No. 4 in Lake Susan Park. There are two sanitary sewer mains that cross County Road 17 just north of Riley Creek. The two sanitary mains are the City's Lake Susan Interceptor and the MWCC Sanitary Interceptor. A third sanitary sewer main crosses at the Lake Susan Hills Drive intersection. There is a limited storm drainage system in the area consisting primarily of a series of rural ditches and culverts. There are approximately four drainage structures in the median of County Road 17 that remove the runoff from the roadway to the ditches. There are private utilities along County Road 17 such as electric, natural gas, telephone, . and cable television. #20737 4 10. Cover Types. Estimate the acreage of the site with each of the following cover types before and after development (before and after totals should be equal): Other (describe) Total 26.5 AC* 26.5 AC * Total area estimated as follows: (7,500')(150') + (400')(75') = 1,155,000' 11. Fish, Wildlife, and Ecologically Sensitive Resources a. Describe fish and wildlife resources on or near the site and discuss how they would be affected by the project. Describe any measures to be taken to minimize or avoid adverse impacts. The project area is entirely within the existing road right -of -way and a majority of the construction impacts will be to the east of the existing roadbed. The cover type within this area is primarily grassy uplands, some of which are maintained through regular mowing. The surrounding land use is primarily residential subdivisions. The quality of these grassy areas is relatively low, given their proximity to the existing roadway and residential developments. The diversity of this particular area is also quite low, with less than ten percent of the area being covered with something other than landscaped or wild grass communities. The wildlife expected to occur in this area would be typical urban wildlife including, but not limited to, songbirds, ducks, squirrels, raccoons, fox, wood chucks, and deer. The proposed construction will not significantly alter the existing habitat by adding two additional lanes of traffic. Therefore, the potential impact of the proposed project on urban wildlife will not be significant. b. Are there any state - listed endangered, threatened, or special- concern species; rare plant communities; colonial waterbird nesting colonies; native prairie or other rare habitat; or other sensitive ecological resources on or near the site? Yes X No #20737 5 Before After Types 2 to 8 Wetlands 1.6 0 Wooded /Forest 0.9 0 Brush /Grassland 11.1 0 Cropland 0 0 Urban/Suburban Lawn Landscaping 7.9 16.5 Impervious Surface 5.0 10.0 Other (describe) Total 26.5 AC* 26.5 AC * Total area estimated as follows: (7,500')(150') + (400')(75') = 1,155,000' 11. Fish, Wildlife, and Ecologically Sensitive Resources a. Describe fish and wildlife resources on or near the site and discuss how they would be affected by the project. Describe any measures to be taken to minimize or avoid adverse impacts. The project area is entirely within the existing road right -of -way and a majority of the construction impacts will be to the east of the existing roadbed. The cover type within this area is primarily grassy uplands, some of which are maintained through regular mowing. The surrounding land use is primarily residential subdivisions. The quality of these grassy areas is relatively low, given their proximity to the existing roadway and residential developments. The diversity of this particular area is also quite low, with less than ten percent of the area being covered with something other than landscaped or wild grass communities. The wildlife expected to occur in this area would be typical urban wildlife including, but not limited to, songbirds, ducks, squirrels, raccoons, fox, wood chucks, and deer. The proposed construction will not significantly alter the existing habitat by adding two additional lanes of traffic. Therefore, the potential impact of the proposed project on urban wildlife will not be significant. b. Are there any state - listed endangered, threatened, or special- concern species; rare plant communities; colonial waterbird nesting colonies; native prairie or other rare habitat; or other sensitive ecological resources on or near the site? Yes X No #20737 5 If yes, describe the resource and how it would be affected by the project. Indicate if a site survey of the resources was conducted. Describe measures to be taken to minimize or avoid adverse impacts. The DNR's Natural Heritage Program conducted a search of their database to determine if any rare plant or animal species have been recorded within or around the proposed project area. Their search found no known records of rare species in or around this area. Given the nature of the project area, it is not likely that it supports or provides habitat for any rare, threatened or endangered species. Much of the surrounding area has been previously disturbed by roadside mowing, prior agricultural practices, and road construction. 12. Physical Impacts on Water Resources. Will the project involve the physical or hydrologic alteration (dredging, filling, stream diversion, outfall structure, diking, impoundment) of any surface water (lake, pond, wetland, stream, drainage ditch)? X Yes _ No If yes, identify the water resource to be affected and describe: the alteration, including the construction process; volumes of dredged or fill material; area affected; length of stream diversion; water surface area affected; timing and extent of fluctuations in water surface elevations; spoils disposal sites; and proposed mitigation measures to minimize impacts. This project will impact adjacent wetland areas and a segment of Riley Creek. The proposed reconstruction project will result in approximately 1.55 acres of wetland being filled. Three wetland areas will be impacted, as shown in Figures 7a -7c. Wetland A, the largest wetland, will receive the greatest impact due to road slope fill, approximately 1.0 acres. This impact has been minimized through increasing the side slopes to the maximum steepness without comprising public safety. Approximately 0.15 acres of Wetland C will also be filled by road slope. Wetland D is a man-made wetland that was created for the purpose of wetland replacement (Figure 8). As indicated in the Corps Permit ( #89- 2081N -74), the size of the required replacement was 4.5 acres. It has been determined that the actual area created is closer to 4.9 acres. The grading plan for this wetland indicates that the created wetland was to stay outside of the County Road 17 right -of -way. However, at the time of construction, the area was graded up to the existing top of slope, instead of the right -of -way limit which explains the 0.4 acre discrepancy. Given this explanation, it is assumed that this portion of the City approved and created wetland area would fall under exemption 10 of the Wetland Conservation Act because they are within the right -of -way that was not intended to be converted to wetland, and it would not change the total wetland replacement required by the Corps. Therefore, the amount of wetland impact that needs to be replaced under the Wetland Conservation Act is 2.3 acres (1.15 acres x 2). #20737 6 Activities within this wetland and the other two wetlands within the project area are currently being coordinated and reviewed by the City of Chanhassen, the Army Corps of Engineers and the Minnesota DNR. As required by the Wetland Conservation Act, 2.3 acres of wetland replacement will be created as compensation for the filled wetland area. It is anticipated that this replacement will be created adjacent to the north side of Wetland A (Figure 9). The County is in the process of trying to acquire this property for the purpose of converting it to wetland. The County will monitor the replacement site for a period of five years as required by the Wetland Conservation Act. Monitoring forms will be completed and submitted to the City at the end of each growing season with descriptions of the site vegetation, wetland types, and ground photos. 13. Water Use a. Will the project involve the installation or abandonment of any wells? Yes X No For abandoned wells give the location and Unique well number. For new wells, or other previously unpermitted wells, give the location and purpose of the well and the Unique well number (if known). b. Will the project require an appropriation of ground or surface water (including dewatering)? Yes X No If yes, indicate the source, quantity, duration, purpose of the appropriation, and DNR water appropriation permit number of any existing appropriation. Discuss the impact of the appropriation on ground water levels. C. Will the project require connection to a public water supply? Yes X No If yes, identify the supply, the DNR water appropriation permit number of the supply, and the quantity to be used. #20737 7 14. Water - related Land Use Management Districts. Does any part of the project site involve a shoreland zoning district, a delineated 100 -year floodplain, or a state or federally designated wild or scenic river land use district? X Yes _ No If yes, identify the district and discuss the compatibility of the project with the land use restrictions of the district. Riley Creek crosses under County Road 17, therefore, a portion of its floodplain falls within the project construction limits (Figure 7c). The proposed impacts to the floodplain area include some minor excavation for the placement of a culvert extension at the creek crossing. Some minor fill will be placed over the culvert as stabilization and as a base for the road surface in this area. Activities within the Creek and floodplain will be coordinated with the DNR Division of Waters and the Riley- Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District, respectively. Appropriate permits and approvals will be obtained prior to construction, as well as the installation of the required erosion control measures. 15. Water Surface Use. Will the project change the number or type of watercraft on any water body? _ Yes X No If yes, indicate the current and projected watercraft usage and discuss any potential overcrowding or conflicts with other users or fish and wildlife resources. 16. Soils. Approximate depth (in feet) to: Groundwater: minimum: 4 average: 14 Bedrock: minimum: 140 average: 160 Describe the soils on the site, giving SCS classifications, if known. (SCS interpretations and soil boring logs need not be attached.) Soil borings are being conducted as part of the design phase of the project. See Question 26 for a more detailed description of soil types. 17. Erosion and Sedimentation. Give the acreage to be graded or excavated and the cubic yards of soil to be moved: acres: a1212roxi�'mate_ly 30; cubic yards: approximately 220,000 Describe any steep slopes or highly °erodible soils and identify them on the site map. Describe the erosion and sedimentation measures to be used during and after construc- tion of the project. #20737 8 Sedimentation is a concern that is related primarily to the construction process. Appropriate erosion control and turf establishment practices can greatly reduce the amount of construction related sedimentation into the receiving waters. These measures will be specified in the contract documents and on the design plans, as required. Erosion control measures typically consist of silt fences, sodding and seeding. Ungrouted riprap with filter blankets will be placed at storm sewer outlets. All disturbed areas will also be seeded with native vegetation. Based on preliminary design, the maximum finished slope ratio on the project is proposed to be 2 (horizontal) : 1 (vertical) to 3 (horizontal) : 1 (vertical). 18. Water Quality - Surface Water Runoff a. Compare the quantity and quality of site runoff before and after the project. Describe methods to be used to manage and /or treat runoff. The proposed project would generate an additional 1.5 acre -feet of storm water runoff over the 1.46 miles of road improvements during a 10 year, 24 hour event. The project would generate an additional 1.77 acre -feet of storm water runoff during a 100 year, 24 hour event. This estimate employs methodology of the U.S. Soil Conservation Service Technical Release No. 55. The quality of site runoff should not be adversely affected by the proposed project. Traffic related pollutants consists of Copper, Lead, Zinc and Phosphorus. A study conducted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) titled, Results of the Nationwide Urban Runoff Program dated December 1983, have identified the above pollutants as the predominant constituents in highway runoff. Other common pollutants are Total Suspended Solids (TSS) and Chloride. TSS and Chloride are introduced into the highway runoff primarily from winter deicing practices and the amounts vary depending upon the application rates and the number if ice /snowfall events in a given year. An effective means of reducing the amount of pollutants discharged into the receiving stream /water body is to provide sedimentation ponds at the outfall of the storm sewers. b. Identify the route(s) and receiving water bodies for runoff from the site. Estimate the impact of the runoff on the quality of the receiving waters. (If the runoff may affect a lake, consult EAW Guidelines about whether a nutrient budget analysis is needed.) The County Road 17 project area lies within the Riley- Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District. The Watershed District requires all runoff collected by the site storm sewer system to be routed through water quality treatment ponds meeting the requirements of the Nationwide Urban Runoff Program prior to discharging into natural water bodies. The project also lies within the City of Chanhassen which must approve water treatment pond designs as well. #20737 9 Storm water from the northern half of the project is proposed to be discharged into a pond created as a part of the construction of Lake Drive in 1989. This pond is located in the southeast corner of Lake Drive and County Road 17 and currently receives runoff from Lake Drive and County Road 17. This pond outlets directly to Riley Creek. A proposed pond to be located east of County Road 17 and approximately 1,600 feet north of Lyman Boulevard would collect runoff from the southern half of the project. This pond would be constructed in accordance _with the Riley- Purgatory- Bluff Creek Watershed and the City of Chanhassen criteria, and outlet to an existing wetland which in turn drains to Lake Susan. Runoff from the southern half of County Road 17 currently outlets to wetlands through ditches on either side of the roadway. 19. Water Quality - Wastewaters a. Describe sources, quantities, and composition (except for normal domestic sewage) of all sanitary and industrial wastewaters produced or treated at the site. None b. Describe any waste treatment methods to be used and give estimates of composi- tion after treatment, or if the project involves on -site sewage systems, discuss the suitability of the site conditions for such systems. Identify receiving waters (including groundwater) and estimate the impact of the discharge on the quality of the receiving waters. (If the discharge may affect a lake, consult EAW Guidelines about whether a nutrient budget analysis is needed.) None C. If wastes will be discharged into a sewer system or pretreatment system, identify the system and discuss the ability of the system to accept the volume and compo- sition of the wastes. Identify any improvements which will be necessary. None 20. Groundwater - Potential for Contamination a. Approximate depth (in feet) to groundwater: 4 minimum; 14 average b. Describe any of the following site hazards to groundwater and also identify them on the site map: sinkholes; shallow limestone formations /karst conditions; soils with high infiltration rates; abandoned or unused wells. Describe measures to avoid or minimize environmental problems due to any of these hazards. None #20737 10 C. Identify any toxic or hazardous materials to be used or present on the project site and identify measures to be used to prevent them from contaminating groundwater. None 21. Solid Wastes; Hazardous Wastes; Storage Tanks a. Describe the types, amounts, and compositions of solid or hazardous wastes to be generated, including animal manures, sludges and ashes. Identify the method and location of disposal. For projects generating municipal solid waste indicate if there will be a source separation plan; list type(s) and how the project will be modified to allow recycling. None b. Indicate the number, location, size, and use of any above or below ground tanks to be used for storage of petroleum products or other materials (except water). None 22. Traffic. Parking spaces added Existing spaces (if project involves expansion) Estimated total Average Daily Traffic (ADT) generated Estimated maximum peak hour traffic generated (if known) and its timing: For each affected road indicate the ADT and the directional distribution of traffic with and without the project. Provide an estimate of the impact on traffic congestion on the affected roads and describe any traffic improvements which will be necessary. The Eastern Carver Coun y Comprehensive Planning Study designates CSAH 17 as a Minor Arterial, Class II. CSAH 17 provides a north /south access to residential and commercial areas in Chanhassen. The current (1992) average daily traffic (ADT) count on CSAH 17 is 6,600 vehicles per day (vpd) from TH 5 to Lake Drive, and 4,400 vpd from Lake Drive to CSAH 18. This value was obtained by the Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn /DOT) and reported in their traffic count data, 1992. The projected ADT for the year 2010 are forecast to be (Source: Eastern Carver County Transportation Plan , 1990): • TH 5 to Lake Drive — 13,600 ADT • Lake Drive to Lake Susan Hills Drive -- 7,900 ADT • Lake Susan Hills Drive to CSAH 18 — 8,000 ADT The existing CSAH 17 right -of -way is 150 feet. CSAH 17 is currently a four lane divided roadway from TH 5 to approximately 2,000 feet south. The remainder of the existing roadway, to Lyman Boulevard, is two lane undivided rural section. In areas where the existing CSAH 17 is two -lane, the roadbed is located on the west side of the right -of -way. There are no designated parking areas along the road. North of Lake Drive, the posted speed limit is 40 miles per hour (mph). South of Lake Drive, the posted speed limit is 50 mph. #20737 11 The proposed action is to upgrade CSAH 17 from a two -lane rural section, to a four - lane divided urban section. (See Figures 4 and 5.) Two 14 -foot traffic lanes will be provided in each direction, with turn lanes at intersecting roadways. An eight -foot bituminous pathway will be constructed along the entire length of the roadway. The median will vary from eight to 20 feet. The minimum design speed for CSAH 17 will be 45 mph. 23. Vehicle - related Air Emissions. Provide an estimate of the effect of the project's traffic generation on air quality, including carbon monoxide levels. Discuss the effect of traffic improvements or other mitigation measures on air quality impacts. (If the project involves 500 or more parking spaces, consult EAW Guidelines about whether a detailed air quality analysis is needed.) The project will have no significant impacts on air quality. Year 1992 and 2010 forecasted average daily traffic (ADT) volumes on CSAH 17 between TH 5 and CSAH 18 have been divided into three roadway segments, they are: 1) TH 5 to Lake Drive -- 1992 = 6,600 ADT; 2010 = 13,600 ADT 2) Lake Drive to Lake Susan Hills Drive -- 1992 = 4,400 ADT; 2010 = 7,900 ADT 3) Lake Susan Hills Drive to CSAH 18 — 1992 = 4,500; 2010 = 8,000 ADT The ADT volumes listed above are substantially less than volumes of traffic typically associated with carbon monoxide (CO) concentrations approaching state air quality standards. The project is expected to have no significant impact on regional emissions of CO because of the relatively low volume of traffic and short (7,500 feet) improvement length. The Year 1992 existing ADT volumes shown above were prepared by the Minnesota Department of Transportation. The Year 2010 forecasted ADT volumes shown above are from the Eastern Carver Coun y Comprehensive Transportation Planning Study, October 1990 24. Stationary Source Air Emissions. Will the project involve any stationary sources of air emissions (such as boilers or exhaust stacks)? _ Yes X No If yes, describe the sources, quantities, and composition of the emissions; the proposed air pollution control devices; the quantities and composition of the emissions after treatment; and the effects on air quality. #20737 12 25. Will the Project Generate Dust, Odors, or Noise During Construction and/or Operation? X Yes _ No If yes, describe the sources, characteristics, duration, and quantities or intensity, and any proposed measures to mitigate adverse impacts. Also identify the locations of sensitive receptors in the vicinity and estimate the impacts on these receptors. The following list shows the number of receptors that are adjacent to CSAH 17. CSAH 17 has been divided into three roadway segments. 1) TH 5 to Lake Drive — No residential development, but 3 office /industrial buildings are adjacent to CSAH 17 and are set back approximately 300 feet from the centerline of the existing roadway. 2) Lake Drive to Lake Susan Hills Drive — 31 front row residential units with either a front, rear, or side yard adjacent to CSAH 17. The nearest front row residence is set back approximately 85 feet from the centerline of the existing roadway. The farthest front row residence is set back approximately 325 feet from the centerline of the existing roadway. 3) Lake Susan Hills Drive to CSAH 18 — 6 front row residential units with either a front, rear, or side yard adjacent to CSAH 17. The nearest front row residence is set back approximately 120 feet from the centerline of the existing roadway. The farthest front row residence is set back approximately 275 feet from the centerline of the existing roadway. Noise will also be generated during construction of the project. Construction noise impacts will be temporary and will be mitigated by limiting construction work to daytime hours. Noise will also be generated by vehicles travelling on the road. Year 1992 and Year 2010 future noise levels have been estimated at the nearest residence for each of the three roadway segments listed above. The noise levels have been estimated assuming ten percent of daily traffic in the peak hour, with one percent heavy trucks and two percent medium trucks. Traffic noise levels along the road are projected to increase as a result of the forecast increase in traffic volumes on the road. Year 1992 and Year 2010 noise level estimates for the three roadway segments are listed below. 1) TH 5 to Lake Drive — 1992 noise levels = L10 54 dBA, 2010 noise levels = L10 59 dBA. 2) Lake Drive to Lake Susan Hills Drive — 1992 noise levels = L10 63 dBA, 2010 noise levels = L10 64 dBA. 3) Lake Susan Hills Drive to CSAH 18 — 1992 noise levels = L10 61 dBA, 2010 noise levels = L10 62 dBA. The state daytime noise standard in residential areas is L10 65 dBA. #20737 13 26. Are Any of the Following Resources on or in Proximity to the Site? a. archaeological, historical, or architectural resources? X Yes _ No b. prime or unique farmlands? X Yes _ No C. designated parks, recreation areas, or trails? X Yes No d. scenic views and vistas? _ Yes X No e. other unique resources? Yes X No If any items are answered Yes, describe the resource and identify any impacts on the resource due to the project. Describe any measures to be taken to minimize or avoid adverse impacts. a. Known Pre - European Contact Archaeological Sites A preliminary records search of State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) files identified five known archaeological sites in the immediate area of the proposed Carver County Road 17 Upgrade Project construction corridor (Harrison 1989; Lothson 1987; State Archaeological Site Files): • CR- CHC -A06: • CR- CHC -A15: • CR- CHC -A16: • CR- CHC -A10: • CR- CHC -A11: • CR- CHC -A17: Burial mound (21CR42) Lithic scatter Small camp site Possible early American burial site Burial mounds Burial mound These sites do not appear to he within the right -of -way acquired for the County Road 17 project, but contribute to the characterization of the archaeological context of the area. The topographic locations of these sites also suggest that similar archaeological deposits may be found intact within the proposed County Road 17 construction corridor. Post - European Contact Archaeological Sites The preliminary records search of State Historic Preservation Office files identified no known post - European contact archaeological sites within the proposed construction corridor. Historic Structures Records at the State Historic Preservation Office no known historical structures within the proposed County Road 17 construction corridor currently listed on the National Register of Historic Places inventory (NRHP). #20737 14 Previous Cultural Resources Investigations A search of records at the State Historic Preservation Office documented three previous archaeological surveys that had been conducted in the immediate vicinity of the proposed County Road 17 construction corridor (Harrison 1989; Lothson 1987; Minnesota Statewide Archaeological Survey, 1981. Several other surveys have been conducted within five miles of the project area. Information obtained during these surveys indicate that_ intact archaeological sites are most likely to be found on high ground near a water source. More specifically, the Minnesota Statewide Archaeological Survey (1981: 16 -19) in Carver County located a number of precontact archaeological sites along wetlands (State Archaeological Site Files). This differs from similar areas in Hennepin County which are usually devoid of these sites. This predictive model for the location of cultural resources in Carver County allows archaeologists to identify areas of cultural resource sensitivity within the project area. Cultural Resources Sensitivity on the County Road 17 Corridor Most of the proposed right -of -way acquired for the proposed County Road 17 construction appears to have been extensively disturbed by previous road construction and residential development. However, one area within the proposed construction corridor has been identified by field reconnaissance as having the potential for intact archaeological sites. • Several remnants of intact terrace on the east side of County Road 17, adjacent to wetlands southwest of Lake Susan (between Minnesota State Plane Coordinate System N/672,000 and N/673,500) b. There are three soil types within the project area that are listed by Carver County SCS as Prime farmland soils. Areas containing these soil types are shown in Figure 10 (Soil Survey map). Prime farmland soil types include Hamel loam, Terril loam and Kilkenney Lester loam. None of the project study area is currently under cultivation or used for agricultural purposes. The entire study area has been previously converted to road right -of -way. Therefore, the impacts to prime farmland are insignificant because they lie within an existing transportation right -of -way. The remaining soil types consist mostly of erodible and highly erodible soils with steep slopes (6 to 25% slope). C. Lake Susan Park is located to the east of CSAH 17. No taking of parkland would be required for this project. Prairie Knoll Park is planned to be located east of County Road 17 (Source: City of Chanhassen Zoning Map, 1994). This area of the corridor is currently being developed. #20737 15 27. Will the Project Create Adverse Visual Impacts? (Examples include: glare from intense lights; lights visible in wilderness areas; and large visible plumes from cooling towers or exhaust stacks.) Yes X No If yes, explain. 28. Compatibility with Plans. Is the project subject to an adopted local comprehensive land use plan or any other applicable land use, water, or resource management plan of an local, regional, state, or federal agency? X Yes _ No If yes, identify the applicable plan(s), discuss the compatibility of the project with the provisions of the plan(s), and explain how any conflicts between the project and the plan(s) will be resolved. If no, explain. The proposed CSAH 17 Reconstruction project is consistent with the Cijy of Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan, 1991, and the Eastern Carver County Comprehensive Planning Study completed in October, 1990 Both documents recommend upgrading CSAH 17 from a two to a four lane facility. The inclusion of a bituminous pathway is consistent with the City's recommended trailway plan. 29. Impact on Infrastructure and Public Services. Will new or expanded utilities, roads, other infrastructure, or public services be required to serve the project? X Yes _ No If yes, describe the new or additional infrastructure/ services needed. (Any infrastructure that is a "connected action" with respect to the project must be assessed in this EAW; see EAW Guidelines for details.) The project will include the installation of storm sewer, street lighting, landscaping and bituminous pathway along CSAH 17 and storm sewer, street lighting and landscaping along Lake Drive. 30. Related Developments; Cumulative Impacts a. Are future stages of this development planned or likely? _ Yes X No If yes, briefly describe future stages, their timing, and plans for environmental review. #20737 16 b. Is this project a subsequent stage of an earlier project? _ Yes X No If yes, briefly describe the past development, its timing, and any past environmental review. C. Is other development anticipated on adjacent lands or outlots _ Yes X No If yes, briefly describe the development and its relationship to the present project. d. If a, b, or c were marked Yes, discuss any cumulative environmental impacts resulting from this project and the other development. 31. Other Potential Environmental Impacts. If the project may cause any adverse environ- mental impacts which were not addressed by Items 1 to 28, identify and discuss them here, along with any proposed mitigation. 32. SUMMARY OF ISSUES. (This section need not be completed if the EAW is being done for EIS scoping; instead, address relevant issues in the draft Scoping Decision document which must accompany the EAW.) List any impacts and issues identified above that may require further investigation before the project is commenced. Discuss any alternatives or mitigative measures that have been or may be considered for these impacts and issues, including those that have been or may be ordered as permit condi- tions. The principle issues of concern covered in this EAW are related to placement of fill into area wetlands, increased noise, erosion potential and archaeological resources. The project is being coordinated with the Minnesota DNR for the extension of the Riley Creek Culvert under CSAH 17, and the Army Corps of Engineers for the impacts to the existing mitigation pond located in the northern section of the study area. Question 8 identifies the required wetland permits for this project. As part of the permit application review process, compensatory mitigation will be designed to replace the wetland areas and functional values. Noise levels will increase as a result of increasing traffic volumes, and proximity of residences to the roadway. State daytime noise standards will, however, not be exceeded. An erosion control and grading plan will be developed and reviewed with the county, city and watershed district prior to construction. Because of the potential for archaeological sites within the corridor, the need for a Phase I archaeological survey along 1,500 feet of the CSAH 17 corridor will be discussed with the Minnesota Historical Society. This survey will determine the presence or absence of pre- and post- European contact archaeological sites within the right -of -way and make recommendations in compliance with Section 106 laws regarding future evaluation and preservation. #20737 17 CERTIFICATIONS BY THE RGU (all 3 certifications must be signed for EQB acceptance of the EAW for publication of notice in the EOB Monitor) A. I hereby certify that the information contained in this document is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge. Signature B. I hereby certify that the project described in this EAW is the complete project and there are no other projects, project stages, or project components, other than those described in this document, which are related to the project as "connected actions" or "phased actions," as defined, respectively, at Minn. Rules, pts. 4410.0200, subp. 9b and subp. 60. Signature C. I hereby certify that copies of the completed EAW are being sent to all points on the . official EQB EAW distribution list. Signature Title of signer Ass sTA N r co u NrY psi N EER Date J u L.V 27 .0 1994 #20737 ADDITIONAL PROJECT INFORMATION Figure 1: Project Location Figure 2: USGS Project Location Figure 3: Preliminary Roadway Design Figure 4: Existing Typical Sections Figure 5: Proposed Typical Sections Figure 6: National Wetland Inventory Figure 7a-c: Floodplain and Wetland Impacts /Mitigation Figure 8: Existing Wetland Design Figure 9: Wetland Replacement Plan Figure 10: Soils Survey Attachment A: Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Letter, July 8, 1994 Attachment B: EAW Distribution List #20737 - _ s Y _ y ca" / 0 7 sH' yo �" 3 '' y' tN sr. W- z 2 "`c,, n.En•�AN 2n a'tP Y n s,: ' - � 0 1 fO7 C . LL 1 r Y-U Q,� 'p r fq ('iTlJln A � o MAPLE � � ` BROKEN ARROW DR.g VAC LUCY R0. C/p �Y RMq °R. a ,-( � GO %>i G SNEN OO.w WESTERN DR. 6 7 U 16� C"DPARPK r,IP. HIAWAIHA OR. O _ � 7. PIEASAM CIR. CARVER s 5 afR ce. � A, szt( fff CA1rvER BEACH FD. >L� I • PARK Zumbra q ° 9 �] 4 a . 18. PIMA BAY ° PL- W 9. HUNTERS CT. YG Zumb S, DR. W n I7. NEZ PERCE CT. y `� e. BLUE PoBBON fake Height D ❑7 TR1x13W smATGOaD Lake r 3 IS CR g 6 RIDGE MinTeewuhi¢ p � s ` ° �'S CREFu �R. .^ O MERR y I RESERVE ] fl sTRATFORO 5 R� r ro] PON E 0 GR. ROLLING 2 LONE EAGLE DR BLVGT RD. _� a �H¢T1'tSOR I ISEH U. ,0 ¢ Y,E BER ��~ N' n� KINGS RD. R� Cedar Point _ Late 20, AUDUBON CR. ` °( J DR. 0 FOF Lotus / Schu 22. PARTRIDGE CIR. L¢X¢ L t 21. TEAL CIR. m q t e. `o, HIuS oR. Na E DR' Lake ' tr TLCf ♦' ; ° w m 28. '� Zo u6N rs2.w Lake '" �R° T116N R21w 23. WHITETAIL RIDGE CT. ~ i di r T "2 ° J � w d PoNTIPG �" 29. O u O D SFt t Ix Tamarack �� ✓OQ f.��i Pl EAR °� 9 0 y u m _ t. u O C Lake c�tl pt.� G� .A FRONTIER ' P a111 AG ?',a. DOVE y. o c( CEOF �/ w � OOTTE CT. u � ^A. CfME�, Q GG it I VICTORIA �' `? �f !/ / rgN of ° 1980 POP. 1425 ((4C V 111 °°° D0n'a �InoL06'ay" _ OR, 112ke Ann D O g TAIM1 ST. 'Pp / 111 Rt CIR. 13 24. s OIESROOY. OR. HI GIIIAND OR. 11 p W. ]]Ih ST. W. ]] 25. CHIPPEWA TR. 0° o E8 OUNIRpN 27. BELMONTVIA° CT. +LDByt" n� J i DR. E 77t S7. CHIPPEW GR. Sti eLw. 13 ❑ o F 28. DERBY DR. eger S� S ¢ YO \ 29. CAN7CRBURf CIR. m CAN'" Se 25 y�Pg d Lake m T1tfN R20W W. PRIWNESS U. ! 9 11. PIMLICO LA IATt61LrR QP ( 8i. S RR� . ° P° q fl 9 i o W. ]6t"Dw Sr. SANTA iE TR.� W o$ D E CHANHASSEN a 1D. IAREDO u. M1 q d �, = r 11. NWUJIS 5T. 1980 POP. 6359 rz. SANTA PE CIR. a w4 nlh sT. O a F p� 1° ' JJ °BLVD. O � 17 Cww N � s ST BNAN VI EW ST. CIX1liER OR, ul - ARBORETU.y W. o 791 � 781n �" OO I �� Il ❑ Jq� 9 �h ST. T- / � pR ]h NpS. 5 RGRR SrIEC B ttEO fR fC.w 1� T] Rx3w �VN1 19 Tl W Rx3w C7. MCHA OR. w . ❑ °R UAE fR ]9th ST. COMMEWA - ST. / g 'J'S z 801 IT ✓ U. OF M. s g `I LANDSCAPE ARBORETUM 5 ( o- d 2 O N " � a s CIR. U+LE DR. ✓ �Wiy QR0 sT 5T. BDIM1 ST. W Z . 8 0th 2f.�I MBER.gOO ST. PROJECT L C A T I 0 N ST O PO ata P•A R0 0.\ Q gp In s� 4 ll� c ` 1 L0 J' B \sL sT te yJ " \3 m BI I/ sr o , azm s. azR sr. � � N"Y D.0 Co ' IAKC O 2 e � z9RS r �e S Rt Rt, R R d a� SINNEN �4, BE A /CTO fA ST. g pDU 1 5 GIR. A _ )v II CIR. 01 - .GP ° DAKOTA w I i WSSPNGE v,pa � LARf Ci. o CHURCH CANE BLVD. 43 I� T116N R21w !� ° DR. m g Lake Susan I s I 1� xo BV 51 " I9 i aGa R� 11 Q 101 A3 wOLI 11 Bell ST. 111 I LY!'AN 86th ST. BLVD. / 0 W. _111 111 _� i . 4 IB 19 Rt I m 18 .roNATH+N� � ✓ w g BLVD. N p U i ° i HILLS „DR. N. V T1 16N R- +22112 i116N R2.1W CHASI{A o �. �/�. a DR. 1 11 1980 POP. 8346 F cauA ° � ZI cT. A suTL1`G, a o t. 5 O cr o y {3 og 17 ` e ERS RD. DR. 19 L.. Lake 18 6 101 aLw. Was ann p yJAR /q SHpRES (�qE' � ryE t1 Nf. I DR p R LAKETOWN TOWNSHIP + ✓ 1980 POP. 2424 RI Lake lBavaria n 16N Rzlw Hazeltine Lake Dm+FOOr TR. 1`116N R2- @ rL 421 w T116N R23W m +V2 a. x 2fl R AVE. NAZE(fR &,VD 01'C'E / TI 6 .. E OR � OR >,pe� /f w I SNADY POINT RD Cp� 1 OOR It 1 I I] °3 /S MtRS cj �� Rz w x.119 Rzaw tx. ° 4 0, z TI , S 26130 fi g, RED �Ia. m i � OSy °O g �I RO S O° OAKWOOD 1. BARBARf KNOLL 3DNpN1LL %' < t At tty Marsh Lake (.I� DR. I 2. FRIENDSHIP LA N. A ND CT.3i4 50 FRIEND IP WE GRACE CIR 5. S ]. ON + $y D(VO HOMESTEAD BENDER R HUNT N. ERS ON I HE CF. CT. ]. V ASHEY . Cr ac g OREE Rt�l' ° Jonatha pa�FT o UR. 4 ( ti° 2 H CrOR k WAY I I 111 �° i UR a •T L. W TR. BLUFF CREE ./ > h SUM, G0p > 6 / R 9P 2 I. VON HERUEN CIR. Jonatha ° s HUNDERTMARK"yb- C.S.A.H. 17 RECONSTRUCTION T. He 5 TO LYMAN BOULEVARD (C.R. 18) CARVER COUNTY M!rr7 m S.A.P. 10-617-11 T w rte 1 DANIEL U. 2. U)UNTPf�UE a 3. Ha EYS(1CNLT 'l ' W. 681h AVpNrh VA t o mY 5 r Bt AI ELO DR. TF t w � f T f�� o� TP. g Q P�Ls i O StONl� STER U G A1LIC NS y DR' . Y R y KILMER a AV 4. MALLARD CT. WO 77� 5. LOOKOUT CT. ULLMANN CIR. Lake ,Riley IgJEER Oa rc II n 0UD t LOCATION MAP HYWIIVG Thresher Square, 700 Third Street Sm neanotis. MN 76413. Phone 6]21370 -0700. Fax 6=37W*1378 FIGURE 1 � E \. ' \ 111611 R23W Ixl� R22W ENNE 31 B ° m / CIR. 111 111 W. 82nd si. ice farsh Lake Tl 6N zxw 9 17 20 EDEN PRAIRIE 1985 POP. 24052 Lake ,Riley IgJEER Oa rc II n 0UD t LOCATION MAP HYWIIVG Thresher Square, 700 Third Street Sm neanotis. MN 76413. Phone 6]21370 -0700. Fax 6=37W*1378 FIGURE 1 CSAH 17 Reconstruction T.H. 5 to Lyman Boulevard (CR 18) Carver County SAP 10- 617 -11 R Figure 2 USGS Project Location N 3 Y i p t C CO (vAl i z __j i RIGHT- OF -WAY LIMITS 4 { a � z d a >� f U1 �� a .. '� EXISTING 't RAILROAD 9 BRIDGE e ;. k d y i Ui Viii Vi - - rI 1'31 LIMITS RILEY CREEK \ sQwDic- Thresher Square, 700 Third street So. Mieneanoli.. MN 35415. Phone 012/370 -0700. Fax GIV370-INS C.S.A.H. 17 RECONSTRUCTION T.H. 5 TO LYMAN BOULEVARD (C.R. 18) CARVER COUNTY S.A.P. 10-617-11 h PRELIMINARY ROADWAY DESIGN FIGURE 3 R/W R/W EXISTING TYPICAL SECTION 2 LANE ROADWAY ROW R/W 75' 75' CL SOUTHBOUND C.S.A.H. 17 I NORTHBOUND C.S.A.H. 17 20' 20' I I 10' 12' 12' 8' 8' 12' 12' 10' SHLDR. LANE LANE LANE LANE SHLDR. I I ------- - - - - -- - - -- -- EXISTING TYPICAL SECTION 4 LANE DIVIDED WITH MEDIAN C.S.A.H. 17 RECONSTRUCTION T.H. 5 TO LYMAN BOULEVARD (C.R. 18) CARVER COUNTY S.A.P. 10-617-11 75' R/W EXISTING TYPICAL SECTIONS B Y W INC. Thresher Square, 700 Third Street So. Minneanolls. MN 55415. Phone 6=370.07oa Paz 6]2/370.1376 FIGURE 4 ROW 75' _ SOUTHBOUND C.S.A.H. 17. R/W - - q R/W C.S.A.H. 17 R/W 1 75 .1 75 I E)OSIMG GRADE TOPSOIL STRIPPING R/W L _ _ I I R/W I 15 4' TOP50. I SOD Cr I I I I Y I t SLED (TYP) tot (TYP)+ EXISTING G TOPSOIL SIRE fL SB C.S.A.H. 17 14! 5 - 25 CL NB C.S.A.H. 17 tr 127 27 15 IV LANE 15 14' 14' LANE 10' I S 5 - 4' IOPSOL t SOD (TYP) LANE LANE 11RNILANE 2W I LAKE I LANE - 4 TOPSOIL t 500 (TYP) 8624 C-w 1r i4' I I 11 14' TUN LANE B624 GG LA16 4' CONCRETE WALK I 8624 C&GI LAW I 8824 CiG fr AGGREG ATE BASEICLASS a 3 , SS PROFLE GRADE 3, I cR 8824 8624 C� I 8624 CW I SB PROFILE GRADE NO PROFILE GRADE NB PROFILE GRADE I SB PROFTE GRADE � I ,G£�y � �� .9r�7► ,42�7s. 4 TOPSOIL t SEED OW) GRADING GRADE GRADING GRADE 1.0' (TIP) 1A' (�)-� lA' (TYP)— I. )� 1.V ( 065- SWAM TREATMENT Y SELECT GRANUAR MATMAL �µ GRADING GRADE SELECT GRANULAR MATEPoAL TYPICAL SECTION R/W C.S.A.H. 17 75 75 SB C.S.A.H. 17 CL NB C.S.A.H. 17 2W I 17 t I I 15 I I S5 a f.5 I 4' TOPSOIL t SOD (TIP) 0.a' -�{ 0. 6 II4�T A.? A SEED TOPSOIL p rBIT. PATH ` C TOPSOIL t SOD (TYP) R/W - 15 14' 14! 5 - 25 It i r tr 127 VARIES r -14' 15 LANE I LANE VARIES V r -14' LANE i LANE 1061 LANE - 4' IOPSOL t SOD (TYP) I NB C.S.A.H. 17 11RNILANE 2W I S5 If 8624 C-w 1r i4' I I Y 11 14' TUN LANE LA16 LANE 1 8824 8624 C&GI LAW I 8824 CiG i 3 , SS PROFLE GRADE I I 8824 8624 I 8624 CW I SB PROFILE GRADE NO PROFILE GRADE I __________ I NB PROFILE GRADE GRADING GRADE 1.0' (TYP)� -I r CONCRETE GRADING GRADE-/ -.- 1.V ( 065- CRADMG GRADE STRIPPING Y SELECT GRANULW TYPICAL SECTION NORTHBOUND TURN LANE CL R/W C.S.A.H. 17 75 fL SB C.S.A.H. 17 CL NB C.S.A.H. 17 2W I t7 VARIES r -14' 1r 1r i4' Y I Y 11 14' TUN LANE LA16 LANE TUN LAKE LAW LAW 8824 CiG i I i 8624 I 8624 CW I SB PROFILE GRADE I 6624 1 I NB PROFILE GRADE GRADING GRADE GtAONP GRADE SWAM TREATMENT Y SELECT GRANULAR MA70M �µ f.0' G TYPICAL SECTION SOUTHBOUND TURN LANE I 4' TOPSOIL t 500 (TYP) SEED I —3 BIT. PATH TOPSOIL t Soo (TYP) R/W 75 1 15 1 1.5 I 4' TOPSOIL t Soo (TIP) 0.51 0. � w•�TT 4' TOPSOIL _ — � I t S® (TIP-)- -- D' W. PATH ' TOPSOIL t SOD (TIP) C.S.A.H. 17 RECONSTRUCTION T.H. 5 TO LYMAN BOULEVARD (C.R. 18) CARVER COUNTY S.A.P. 10-617-11 PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTIONS B Y W INC. Thresher Square, 788 Third Street So. FIGURE 5 oli.. MN 55413. Phone 6121370 -8700. Fax 612/370-1378 C.S.A.H. 17 RECONSTRUCTION T.H. 5 TO LYMAN BOULEVARD (C.R. 18) CARVER COUNTY N �PEMC i I �� .1 \ ILZUSA PV6G. �{. rEM PEMCI �E,nc �luin ►.;risen,. -,:- —.-�• t f2 — PEMal PFGC- PFnn. i FEW' �'. �P:Mal I tEHF Q ;•` tEMC ''� 0. PE MC t 1. _. -•_ n , 1 �� ' � Q � _LENeCI ?_ti1G ' • •�•� f P:MC . !SS1C Lc aAC i . ..a `. " .PUS F PE'ACl ! — CEMCl.. Eft C . I _ pry FEW t'EMA Jr_ PEMC1 - %_: t'�,. —J[i` 3 / _ ,___ . J� . _ il• •\.a�'� PS�+C ' �L/� �. n •: � Q� - � �, �'" .. '� '� i — :.tiG. 926 � c , AA � � 1 — "� P"Ac pt ,IWINC. NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY Tbmb.r S 7W Third Str" S FIGURE 6 ML".■polls, ?,M SUM Ph"s GUMO.OM F" elu770-177e X I .k t Io W ;r J m z i f42 ` X ca Q I ,• a '„ ` +r • J r r Y L i t '!IE It N C.S.A.H. 17 RECONSTRUCTION PRELIMINARY ROAD DESIGN T.H. 5 TO LYMAN BOULEVARD (C.R. 18) AERIAL TOPOGRAPHY 0 200' 400' CARVER COUNTY FLOODPLAIN EXTENTS R WETLAND IMPACTS WETLAND MITIGATION Nswn+c nn"wsmu,Mnhdst"A SE- FIGURE 7 —A WM.■.o a& UN sous. lro.. 82=06"L Y� n%M"Ina TER LINE -1 3t �'' .� fi t \ •� \ �� Gl- \ i'y��r� _ �'>� I - -1• � _ L }• J ,ma � i. - � .t, � ��< - +°-•. _._- � _ A —W j i A lr'�l :`� K `J`�..��: �� _ " ��'�� - ..�„ : � - i w cd _ .� ,�...�+y.L - �"�.:- � ..Y ��.,� - I'.. �. �.- '�� - y� -� 1,i 1��_ 1� - - .�' � l" � •'� -�-.'� �'�€' .i. "�,.�q�: �;:. .,i''. , .;f -��• � , ' _'�r .t,,. y �- •.�6,. � 'a• �;� ?aa 7�r g Reel zr W-7- 0 W �n __�j� — - /�.. ../ � - � -' W i �� ( �I / —, � . ., •'.v ."r� r.- �J.[i - T' � �e ��.�, jV_ y �p WETLAND - 13— 7 ' EDGE OF PAVEMEN N - TURN LANE - rlll� n Or I, h7 -^77 Hlu - 4 r co ENTER LINE HT TURN LAI C ti _ �e ^s` . >' - S ' - � •` . ' • ` _ :'-\a � �n ` �:�N,� _. i.. •.�' _ ..� r.`j 0 41) - pr�� Z 1 w -- I - "aim5 ir, -- ..- .r.•c- r � � _ � � �R�, `` ��. _ to 15 ACRES A- N g4i7 ' WETLAND IMPACT tO. ..... WETLAND Cg— � 100 YR FLOOD PLAIN EXTENT! .. .'��' _ A4 W 75 x V 4 4 1 I S C.S.A.H. 17 RECONSTRUCTION PRELIMINARY ROAD DESIGN T.H. 5 TO LYMAN BOULEVARD (C.R. 18) AERIAL TOPOGRAPHY 200' 400' CARVER COUNTY FLOODPLAIN EXTENTS N It w ING Th gqu• 7w Tkird sbwt so. IM 554M rim. 8221370.07M F.X 622W0 WETLAND IMPACTS WETLAND MITIGATION FIGURE 7-13 �+'` i:. ':h�+.� -Z`•� �: _ - :\ �t� \ . i � � '� �- r .::._-..�:_ ��:rR+"�';c _ `�C' - --: f . - k,c �� is �.. !�_ -`�:• ��•' • `t - - , u';� !.. -. ; "••- ,; �. -'�` � .ice - _ j > a t � � e r a " . ":P f ' - - i 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN EXTENTS �t � �;..,.. �� -t :' •,�,�� %i �;t, r tt��+ }" . -• • 1 ,/s nOY✓ ,Y i/ �+� . 4 �'� "/� 1 _1 / r•. ,� _.,4 !� , . \�; \' •.o r. J ..(�� "-, dec':_c.. 't \ -�.\• ,. \!4 i i. .,.�1r !T� .yq a \. s� t _ .»?»: •a' - .�= - •'7r:. - .�,•.'.y.�. ��^�"".�. �•.� '�;, + ',n.k \ % ' / . ` 1!3 Z� ♦ a ` ` �. �`C' :. i 1. t - e ! _ 3 t j; i /� :'.. :✓ ` �.. _ v i• ;3 ! n;F+ c 4.l . a te•:. �- +.:C•..,r . �,:x •��'+ �- \��:r ` \ -��; �i. ''�,... / ��= ..' -`:, = �5.: -- ^:.:.- �"':..... - \ �i S t , f . - }: ? �� .�*.t 4�- yy'.1. r...•.tc. :'S." T.e�' y 1 ,j . -r_ •;y� *:+�p. -;i•.1 ,. � � 1 �i1 � �:__ � �. &s ,JD •,�" :y_r - _ N ♦ :Qk ' t =�. i� _ 3 :,S a. � . i�� ', i,` - _ R3 ` �� :9i:' ! \ \. �...- .. 'i�.' �' � �_ \ 'I f — " Vx'��✓ P�� -' 'C' 't.+� �� .• ,[� '^ � weir �r � � �\ ;..-� -� �•%�:. ..•,` + a>,.. �`� _ �.,��• _„ �4'. c i11 +a ,+ - ,, \ `;; x ;j:a r_ »��i •F��,r t s 3,.� r �� i' " t �- v' !' - 1 \\ w, �l:' ♦ � / - � . `�.. ��__ ✓. ..rte. r ,, j+�� a °� �. J��.�.,y:i.. - q . s ./ � .};s - ;r \ q: - i �.J.J �� .�-. --__ /� "%C,Y�_. —� _�,s_ •':^^c �.,.« . _ i.:('p. �f. � .4 - , - ��, '� :,\:. �p2 'i \ "� t - ` �. '��'�'' �•+!'�,.- ,-,.'#�'� �'? — - a' may: >�,• � ��'�. a t� a rte: R ♦; :4a \, ' ,'a` �e'.i�`�P► <"9'" ` '•. `'" • s•!a _y 9 r ir. y� -.:. � rx� 1 s:`� � 1lt � i � '{$ - ✓K -�'\ a zi �_. +t• •',.?__i. �f 1� .'E-� /g � :� �'� ♦.� tE`�. �!�•' .. .�. � J r�� ab' • - J,%"'S � ,1 ... .i'r ', %- i-,.;' `'fi - : ". \ � �\ .�-� `'°"".:� }• �'tr+�.. "� � ` �n0 t� i ` . _ j '7� �. � 5� � •:< •�" . . I• °_ T 1 _ ,. /� / ' } -, 4}. ._ �, Y Y_. 9 •�:: � �/� - �- <..C._ + t:'..7Y - _�F � h 3 A .,,.� ; / :�Y � . ._. '/ .v `.J .., f:. -7 J�dA' es. l ` 11f �` -- -�,-. � \ \� -- :±�y'•� �' e . _•�.z�. �t`t ° -� � - ..t -.Z �F' . F:< `'�;'" ` " "" - : +� �. :f 3••:f -rt. a'y��'`� r � �' '�� `_ \\ �Q� \� Fi y j � .. �� t� AK_. /�, : ; a.:. 'va'9.' I ,j. _ F r::t� -�" te r' � � '►�- _ . c . �� \ \� - .- `� .`.♦ :^tee - , \� ' i. �`.�r• `.� I C- ��1_':. '�� .r --- '. :I7. .��J ,.Yfj - t'�> �� : R.O.W. CENTER LINE - �t. � _4 �..2 - 3� ?��. a...t s + ':'S••I - � f ` . i � , _ - 1'_ .7 �� .�D,' .'\ �� S�.' 'y IMPACT',` WETLA ND _ _ � r_, •:J`�r': a ..: tv .'*?'•�. �.• -•�'r .. 1'.i 1" - .i= .« .�.'IC�•' < �.:�= :' /, y .� - p p �c .• .f'. _ -_ '+" ♦ � >� '�`C, r � 4 � ` K�''.Y ��2ir1'.:�"' -�. � 1 ' � r �•"� .Y .; �� i' ¢ '4 _0.40 ACRES .� ' .- �..:.; ` ,,} �` '�' y � - �s `+'ma --�� .J � .•..,. •� °•,' r.`: a :•,,",F�. �,,.�. - --• •-��+ l ° " _.....av= ,.r. f`L !`" `� ,1 � ,',:.�• / .i� .;:-,, ENT ' =s EDGE OF PAVEMENT . �;�' i � : - RIGHT TURN LANE RAILROAD BRIDGE `, s �� '- � �" � \ .,,o.�~• � `tom '" �; :�,1••� i� _ - - ..J''�.� � - ��''•. � /; •�'" � ��•� �"�,.. -. - _ .i � -�. - ' �"'��.. '� �a'�� --tee " - " � � �x3"'".+ -•� _ - _ �. � � `4e>r•• •'^r Vii -... _ � ` "�`�'� C �� 1 - f?� 1 .+� E `" _ . - .r< .o• .. LANE `� �. r -=- x _ _ `'i'""a RIGHT TURNy L _ -. _ 1- � � (; �,, fi� •p � :: — tt _ �i'!!�j��r • . _.'rt -° y�� itT, ,� "..,� "'..a / v- ',:' . F' SF�.' WETLAND - Y ROAD 17'' LANE � COUNT END CONSTRUCTION *•'..:• 100 YR FLOOD- STA. 75 +42 I - r - PLAIN EXTENTS �` �- _' �- ,`z� , , •-�•- 's �'�- - 3 -. �� ` py ie :'l� 6r ' - � t �• p• ..,,�, _ ;'ma -^ yr � , �' /�? •\\ END CONSTRUCTION oo ' �,,p / fit. � \r v yr.,�M -./ � K � ^�:_ , UrY IkK '`ia, -..v ...�,:.. +yam `+,`_• ^.. yY...a, ...Y ! `tom "-,'(tit O, �- - -� - '� ' STA. 4 +95 •�, ;�i�"R ��t,y,.• Y ..', .. `w.�''?• -'rs t a, 'Y;+r•c,,,,.. ) .. '� r ~ •. .a. ..`k Y' ✓ 'Q ®. �y ct .• '4� ;�a'+7�., a"" r�r.. �'•^�, q: �. a '� /��f!.�)�� ,� 7 :f'.3�' � ;j� �' c ' + r l' � -' e � - �I'I, ._ �\ .! � ,� �r� .`.,E. I I!p . / _ � i vf. - r}. - � ►u�'\ At Y 1• �� . . , 1'.. .;1.'- _ * � ' '.''t�+� ° �i'1'�.... .,.� •w'a''�v.. . W" t / ' /j� ! _ � - r I '111 - ^� ry,'�v? - :�: .r s .: � z. •A .` r...' ^ s �-'��. a . " A'''qu :; �� w �, * �5ti. � ., �. �- / s " � / � .1 � - 1 . �:�' � - � :-�'�.-"�. t 4 I � ' L'' ='. s. � 1 Y.: I r"� at�'"`��61C`�� d �'� -. � '� � i�i ��•, ' � � _ - �• _.�: - � �� G _ � ,..,r., .'� \s ;:; _s• .,;:' .i�'�,`.�,`,`•�„ :+.-: •ma ..'`- *s j' .�� /,. �,, . `i. pS :A. \ - ' j �. -�'9 I.��' �� %' �Q'2+ �2' Cf�r -� �9 t+" < ♦'4. J 'Y1�.pI J. N C.S.A.H. 17 RECONSTRUCTION PRELIMINARY ROAD DESIGN T. H. 5 TO LYMAN BOULEVARD (C.R. 18) AERIAL TOPOGRAPHY 0' 200` 400' CARVER COUNTY FLOODPLAIN EXTENTS R WETLAND IMPACTS WETLAND MITIGATION =x>«r— Th...bw S 7W Thh4 strmt s.• .�.W.U.1A Pb�_ ".12MMI. FIGURE 7 —C 6'X 16'X 3 I?,SJLATfON ; SKIMMER DETA DENOTES BORING LOCATION 6 0"0 .C. i 4 DENOTES PEAT PROBE LOCATION EL.662.8� 2X!2 (9 DENOTES TEs'PORARY PIEZOMETER LOCATION TO RILEY CREEK 2x4 SPREADER BLOCK 2X8 SPACER -«- I 8x6 POST" rr- W2 ,21112 ZXl2 2X4 SPPEADER BLOCK CLEATED iOGEIHER EVERY 3' WITH 2X4 CLEAT PLAN VIEW \ \ \`\ \ \\ — — // / 4'-ExE POST 1 / 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 00 / // // 1 / �! 1 1 ` 1 SE 1) LS w I) USE CT!CN VI 3/6 0 GALVANi'ED LAG BOLOS WITH WASHERS TQ FASTEN BDAZCS To POSTS. AR POSTS. ALL OTHER FASTEN- ARE } j0 BE GALv- 1 1 , 2) ALL BOARDS TO =E 0.4 GCA PCNDERCSA PINE - 1 1 3) CUT PCST EVEN WITH 70P OF BOARDS t ' l I CI 1 1 1 \�/ nl I 1 I I 4) EMBED ENDS OF Sxik AT LEAST 4' INTO THE :LtBANKMENT - cc 1 1 \ \\ I I I I 1 oO /'. // i t I ry� \ \ \\ \\ \ \\ \\ ` -' '// \\ ♦ \ \ \\ \ \ \�� - _ - -� // '� / /' '/940/ � //' /. N'>"1L =882.0 ;YL =883.5 \ LAKE: SUSA � /�� l i!I � , r / �• IQO R.D TY? / �� --I � \ \` ',— � —�/ /� / j� 0lih'L= �.�i1.8 • P6c�� • yon.. ZE _ T.H. tOt REALIGNMENT / LAKE DIVE PARK SEDIMENTATIO P / DITCH GRA ! I SHEE F IGURE 8_ rA k�S W ..: •_,,,•�.r.._ �c� - ` : ` \ - ; �_ 7 . a ._ _ ...et^''�.1 �.r� s ffkkii� :,.� .1 �,t `. Si R So. 4 �k . — A74 Mb v 2A, 5 - � �: t� .R• „ .:.'��. 'a+t3^'r:v'.�`ti:f �-•. -e r t •G i �: �F i 5 1 Z •E ;' . \!-; Lt 5 L , tP — a :A ---------- v an, v — --------- 01 .;– PROPOSED CONTOUR S 4"1 • � 'viii: � �� - ��'��' •= ''��' ii' - 'g ND PROPOSED WETLA t k MITIGATION ARE N 0 200' 400' I I w INQ Thresber Square, 700 Third Street So- imm.spolim, MN BUTS. )-► 6221370-0700, Y&x $12MMMS - p. .. I -� , 7 � ,»' %' � - is • .• ' 'ti . _ � �' � r �. i •'�`'r. "T.�r.� J . �� : C. S. A. H. 17 RECONSTRUCTION T. H. 5 TO LYMAN BOULEVARD (C.R. 18) CARVER COUNTY WETLAND REPLACEMENT PLAN FIGURE 9 C.S.A.H. 17 RECONSTRUCTION T.H. 5 TO LYMAN BOULEVARD (C.R. 18) CARVER COUNTY Ai D- K3 -, ' � Ku D 3 R W rNC Thr..b.r Sq 700 Third St S-. Mlan.apoLls. We' 53413. phoo. 6121370-0700. fax 51=70-1378 SOILS SURVEY MAP FIGURE 10 ATTACHMENT A MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES LETTER JULY 8, 1994 rA�J� OF c _ N 4k 500 LaFAYETTE ROAD J ST. F.AUL, M'WiNESOTA ONR INFORMATION (612) 296 -6157 July 8, 1994 Beth Kunkel BRW, Inc. 700 Third Street South Minneapolis, MN 55113 Re: C 17 reconstruction f ro m TH 5 tJ Lyman Blvd., TI 16N R23W sections 1 14 and 23, Carver County. Dear Ms. Kunkel: The Minnesota Natural Heritage database has been reviewed to determine if any rare plant or animal species or other significant natural features are known to occur within one mile of the above referenced project. Based on this review, there are no known occurrences of rare species or natural features in the area searched. The Natural Heritage database is maintained by the Natural Heritage Program and the Nongame Wildlife Program, units within the Section of Wildlife, Department of Natural Resources. It is the most complete source of data on Minnesota's rare, endangered, or otherwise significant plant and animal species, plant communities, and other natural features, and is used in fostering better understanding and protection of these -rare features. The information in the database is drawn from many parts of Minnesota, and is constantly being updated, but it is not based on a comprehensive survey of the state. Therefore, there are currently many significant natural features present in the state which are not represented by the database. We are in the process of addressing this via the Minnesota County Biological Survey, a county -by- county inventory of rare natural features, which is now underway. However, Carver County has not yet been surveyed. Because there has not been an on -site survey of the biological resources of the project area, it is possible that ecologically significant features exist for which we have no record. Thank you for consulting us on this matter, and for your interest in minimizing impacts on Minnesota's rare resources. Please be aware that review by the Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program focuses only on rare natural features. It does not constitute review or approval by the Department of Natural Resources as a whoie. An invoice for the work completed will be forthcoming. You are being billed for map and computer search and staff scientist review. Billings are done quarterly by the State Department of Administration in March, June, September, and December. Sincerely, Jan Shaw Wolff Endangered Species Environmental Review Specialist Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program 612/296 -8279 nhp 950011 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER MINNESOTA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY BOARD ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROGRAM EAW DISTRIBUTION LIST CSAH 17 RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT Environmental Quality Board Environmental Review Program 300 Centennial Office Building 658 Cedar Street St. Paul, MN 55155 Jim Alan Department of Public Service 200 Metro Square Building 121 7th Place East St. Paul, MN 55101 Tom Balcom Department of Natural Resources Office of Planning 500 Lafayette Road, Box 10 St. Paul, MN 55155 Paul Hoff Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Environmental Analysis Office 520 Lafayette Road St. Paul, MN 55155 Kevin Johnson Office of Waste Management 1350 Energy Lane St. Paul, MN 55108 Doug Thomas Board of Water and Soil Resources 90 West Plato Boulevard St. Paul, MN 55107 Historical Society State Historic Preservation Office 345 Kellogg Boulevard West St._ Paul, MN 55102 Zona DeWitt Legislative Reference Library 645 State Office Building St. Paul, MN 55155 Environmental Conservation Library 300 Nicollet Mall Minneapolis, MN 55401 Gerald Larson Mn /DOT Environmental Services 3485 Hadley Avenue North Oakdale, MN 55128 Rita Messing Minnesota Department of Health Dinnaker Building PO Box 59040 925 Delaware Street SE Minneapolis, MN 55459 -0040 Paul Burns Department of Agriculture 90 West Plato Boulevard St. Paul, MN 55107 Ben Wopat, Chief U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Functions Branch 1135 U.S. P.O. & Custom House St. Paul, MN 55101 -1479 7/28/94 William D. Franz Chief of Environmental Review Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 230 South Dearborn Street Chicago, IL 60604 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Twin Cities Field Office E.S. 4101 East 80th Street Bloomington, MN 55425 -1665 #20764 Lynda Voge, Referrals Metropolitan Council Mears Park Centre 230 East Fifth Street St. Paul, MN 55101 Charles Folch City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Riley- Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District Attn: BARR Engineering 8300 Norman Center Drive Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55437 Soil and Water Conservation District 219 East Frontage Road Waconia, MN 55387 -1862 Chanhassen Public Library 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 Carver County Attn: Bill Weckman 600 East 4th Street Chaska, MN 55318 BRW, Inc. 700 Third Street South Minneapolis, MN 55415 #20764 2