Loading...
6a. Environmental Assessemtn for TH 5 from TH 41 to Heritage Rd. 1 ., CITY OF =CHANHASSEN 1 ., �\ J f 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 / } ' (612) 937-1900 Ac1r n by Ctty . rnioi t.ator MEMORANDUM 'P.rrie'ie 1___._______._._._. II �?ejecteL_. _. ...__._ TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager Dats._1/ .Il4E'-_, Date S:Ibritted to Go:nn :7.ictt FROM: Gary Warren, City Engineer ei I Date Subo;iit,=u to UoL.nc[j DATE: November 10 , 1988 I SUBJ: Approval of Environmental Assessment for Trunk Highway 5 from Trunk Highway 41 to Heritage Road in Eden Prairie File No. PW173 IAttached are excerpts from the Environmental Assessment completed for Trunk Highway 5 widening from Heritage Road in Eden Prairie ( just east of Mitchell Lake) to Trunk Highway 41 in Chanhassen. I The introductory summary information presents an overview of the project which I am sure most of the Council are familiar with. The summary in the report states that the project will have no Isignificant negative impacts on the surrounding environment. Possible impacts which they have highlighted are typical to I construction of this magnitude and are summarized on Page 2 of the attachments . Basically, there is proposed the displacement and relocation of approximately five homes and one business as well as access changes for approximately eight homes and one I business along the route. The most significant environmental encroachment areas are in the Mitchell Lake area in Eden Prairie. I Discussions with Carl Hoffstedt, District Transportation Planning Engineer with MnDOT, indicates that they have received very few comments on the EA to date, and those that have been received I have been very positive, reinforcing the project' s importance. From this point in the process MnDOT will be preparing the Findings Of No Significant Impact (FONSI) . They are currently awaiting the State Historical Review which is a key element of the FONSI. It is therefore recommended that the City Council approve the I Environmental Assessment for Trunk Highway 5 (S.P. 2701-28 and S.P. 1002-44 ) dated September 19 , 1988 . The City might want to take this opportunity to reinforce to MnDOT our support of this project and our continued interest to have the project expedited IIas quickly as possible. Attachments: Excerpts from Environmental Assessment Report. tMemo from Asst. City Planner dated November 2 , 1988. II • r .,, „. . - ' • } „ i ` ` > ' t f''k''. r)..ev i,.. i .a '/'"`.ot YS'.=:-it;Fl.. -.i: -:' - ce , ; -, e°# .�4 ,p1;..;. . '' •U. S• DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION +•ti$• �4; v 45.1`" y r, s , F z= �a: S� ` _ ;'>,;FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION •- -s,::-t>. t X h.*.f ] y-L t 1< \�f ' 0, _4 _ _ '4 r$; 'y :k''nt � ENVIRON_MENTAL ASSESSMENT - - ,,; .-Ft.,. k; � - yc��'` # --. t s is !1,4,.,.. r •rc,µ , > - ., }., _ :- 1 •j -_'�T't M{2eti r F ,iM�V' ,t.. gam"' y •�' t' "''� .r _ -x. .._.. e ... A.'�' r<� " MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION• � x '' Oi ` ' :hyp "�i=trj�" DISTRICT S „ '! ; r.-may. 4 4k4�.z y�� +:_„ } i., 4{SrF`5 Si*,r• r'```-,,"..•:b;,. '"iw,R+`;-4=N a; -x �4=i,ti,r :'.Y,'K•:i:<'.:';;;ti`:t -g.':V _ --Y�.,.-1.:,t.. �.,4�.- �,i�ip' xro fi��3i"� �,. .�}K+anay3s�-���v. i•CS�1'�•�(i.,;.Lf^- .�� Su�•�.. .P: =r`.i.'f! r;=�-�i .'` ` 4,".6'. II ., =?S .===.-,. 4�Y 1 r,, -'+ . :. tt•, •i. Yi.13- •`sak .a .r:_ ..:f "�, ',• - x••11.. t f- f i-�.t� .. ,t' i > ,N ypt li hk,:`N. _ _• # • .,-.=,kv,_s`. .,;a•• tr'ta+t, - , ? " •Y•"'t'.;: +..;X$"f� �t r^^'t t F,`c-' ,.r' .ze. 1 N - '!` C s ;z +s t>• .'u�?''�.it r 4. r k; e�,X...... ` " S !`4-f."-j.:.-:.' .'4,f,:.:, ,i-:' ':'. r {' YAq S."$:*, n'-q .i 1.,-.-iyt 5.-.4.:-a.. „a 4 - -y.z.t. - y Y r,Y. " 1; 'k- ���+� ` : :;�ry'" `v7« Jt i�� -`:i• •�-*: .,..4..•s<:}.� .E�'r, y.z, �,r%!,�°'�nr ?,.�'�4 v�.t�,-• .,s�,�� �;:;� -t ,-.s._• a5r'4z•",..._. ' ��y�t_},a'�-r:\. 'i •?no_.t= -!,; •- ._4t* it.-- ,-1i^4.7-.t-n, } a Y':�s. ^',+.ic r.+ 4 _•c-K>,i Y ;`:^ �a - r,e S.�-s3.i;•• ,�# n, � rt����"iq•. :T•�'t-`•�it' r}'`'%::.i •:, r,$i_ ., s •.„.sr• "\Y t� 't, _ ;�`•� t'%C.• . '! ''t• i,•:.,t: � xi •': ' '" :!3 4-is ,,s:.t , _ ' f k'.`♦ k f •. nv '••,??'+5•' _, 1nb,c.•. ?',.>±.r�^- t'{'..• j,E.l; �.:-:it 4 +qt u'Y?,• ^L 1 r. - rd /5,#'_ Y F3* .;� -0 3ra, _t3•r Y• - _ - - - ' 0<a.. j�` .-* ,4.iu �u_rR1 S.P. 2701-28 r ,. ,.- ,:'" ''�A 'Z ;•"• , 3;� fe: ' : r ' {T H 5 fit`^ s ' '4) ,g; - � " 'ais > S.P. 1002-44 ■ ■ E �� rk Minn. Project F 014-3 (36) - •�`• si. '4,41:7,,..5.-„;....:- ..• „_ � ,r,sq, Regrading, Surfacing'` ,y=r'. ::' Roadway Bridge (Over Soo =. . t.%. Second Roadwa & g ( o Line R/R) ;II,.�;, :'..,, : ,” °- From T.H.41 in Chanhassen, Carver County ounty 2,f, r_ - j_s: z :;A- to CSAH 4 in Eden Prairie, Hennepin County ,.' -- ,'_..'_. .4 4o,i.. i. . a1,7--."tt'' _ _ _ - - _ _ ,_ „ `"• , ` 1 -,t �atr am`�-S,i i - . " t it s _ -..n, :'4;EM-. . - ,- _� _r. Yti+-.e- � +` asa.' pt» ,arlt. mac. :i.,. .,. V �F�/:i } V{iY :. Win:.. 0.,:: l� '/� i✓ ,4 pt ._, _ . _4 L: t %4 E t ! 7 r. .. ; ( .: t r 15 _: . -� r•.� s` w` , � . �t,, ,r• _..} ;_ : r- s o' ' - • _ � . ,> ENIUEERINGIEPT , _ .i , y �4y w.r_ „ . !j i .4 Yh `r :,. Ii ii • I 1 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT for I [ Mn/DOT TRUNK HIGHWAY 5 II- State Projects 1002-44 & 2701-28 Minnesota Project F 014-3 (36) I [ From near T.H. 41 to 0.2 Mi. W. of Hennepin CSAH 4 approximately 5.0 miles Cities: Chanhassen & Eden Prairie - Counties: Carver & Hennepin - Dist. 5 II I Submitted Pursuant to 42 USC 4332 (2) (C) I by the U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration and the 11 Minnesota Department of Transportation Work consists of the upgrading of an undivided two-lane roadway to a divided four-lane roadway with another bridge over the Soo Line Railroad. II- I Contacts: FHWA: Stephen J. Bahler Mn/DOT: Evan Green Senior Area Engineer 2055 N. Lilac Drive Suite 490 Metro Square Building Golden Valley, MN 55422 St. Paul, MN 55101 (612) 593-8537 (612) 290-3259 IAppro l . • a 11- , Date 8'2 Y Ir-0 p F E. E. Ofstea Assistant Co+ issioner, Technical Services Div sion - Mn/DOT e Date Charles Foslien Division Administrator Federal Highway Administration TABLE OF CONTENTS IT II Page Cover Sheet i II Table of Contents ii List of Displays iv Metro Index Map v Location Map vi II PROJECT IDENTIFICATION 1 1- INTRODUCTORY SUMMARY II Purpose of this document 2 Purpose of this project 2 II Possible impacts 2 PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PATH l' Path selected 3 II Federal action determination 3 State Environmental Review 3 Minnesota Intergovernment Review Process 3 II TIME SCHEDULE 4 FUNDING 4 II PROJECT MANAGER 4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION II Project Area 5 Existing Facilities 5 IISignals 5 Turn Lanes 5 Bridge 10009 6 Bicycle, pedestrian facilities 6 Traffic 6 II NEED FOR PROJECT II Safety 6 Project Selection 7 I_ ALTERNATIVE i II PUBLIC AND AGENCY INVOLVEMENT Public Hearing City Involvement S II County Involvement 9 Railroad Invoh,-ement 9 Public Involvement 9 II Permits Requiied 9 ii II I II II L -,• .. "aC'v.D.i:'it-t .•-. ._ . Ii Associated Planning & Projects 9 Metropolitan Council 9 Carver County 10 Hennepin County 10 I IS.P. 1002-49 10 S.P. 2701-24 10 T.H. 212 10 Pedestrian/Bicycle 10 I I Conclusions 11 SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, & ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 11 IAccess Control 11 Aesthetics 11 Air Quality 12 III- Bicycles & Pedestrians 12 Construction Impacts, Excess Materials 12 Erosion 12 Economics 12 IEndangered Species 13 Farmlands 13 Flood Plains 13 III Groundwater, Geology or Earthborn Vibrations 13 Hazardous Wastes 13 Historical, Archaeological/Cultural Sites 13 Land Use 13 I Noise 14 Right-of-way 15 Parks, Recreation, 4(f) , Etc. 15 I Relocation 15 s_ Social 16 Controversy 16 1 Traffic 16 Transit 17 Vegetation 17 Wildlife 17 Water Quality 17 Wetlands 17 Synergistic Effects of Associated Planning 18 IMitigation 18 APPENDIX IlL Bridge Inspection Report - Br. 10009 20 Accident Summary (reduction) 21 Air Quality Analysis 22 IlL Chanhassen Trail Plan ( total system) , Preliminary 25 Eden Prairie Trails 26 Bikeway Evaluation 27 Bikeways 29 II- iii Il- i I II 1rFarmland Conversion Impact Rating II Carver County 30 Ir Hennepin County 31 Floodplains 32 II Noise Analysis 33 ir Vegetation Concerns 39 Wetlands List 42 II Wetland Locations 43 Traffic Forecasts 44 I[ 1 Ir LIST OF DISPLAYS I page II Index Map v Location Map vi 1 Air Quality Analysis Receptors 24 II1 Bikeways 29 INoise Study Areas 37 I Wetland Locations 43 Traffic Forecasts 44 I IL II iv II n 1 II Ii TWIN CITIES METRO AREA IF f . IF MINNESOTA 1i p itIiPLS •: 8 -� ST, PAUL 0 ANOKA4 MILES 1I Vi n G.I �II Project al° I :�" `S1�d Location v II Area ,rHGTON it t II NENNCPIN `ih i ,, 1 Ilk voinolionztoit�iiii, ,,,, ..f___,...7 • _ i It v 0 ..... ... _ . 42\ on, Pr '6 ' IfitiO-—I AC I m ' ' gokrt: ,f'b.? a a 1110M1115311 IV' ‘ ‘11 -41141 I PliaratV1110/. di Whillkh I ( 1?1111 4 4 i;; alk 1011"44/.' \ ffiume41111ft.ail- fiemill --a 5i ` i ir, _ ro • 5 m 11110111101,�, A - - 0 .1610 1,1p N fit di / 'b. r P . 44 rf .,.02---'- .4- .‘,,,. ,..zra-iiiiii Ase •'/ tw t*. _-- .LIL I_ (1) . ,,,-;' iNg al -\11. ( 0 V ra r � � � O DAKOTA Z SCOTT 9 Q ' Jo A o I iir - . . c i, _ t S.P. 1002-44 4,40-4 2701-28 111 y LOCATION MAP rµ ., v � 2 1 ' p'^^". __ +l t..,A. Minnetonka a /„^ 2000' 0 5(:.91.L� i�� f ,_„ La„ _ =4-� I 2000' 4000' fi 11 MLYNETONLA BEACH! ®�p ` A ' H 1985 I 1980 POP.575 / E. y �` ��� J yn-,(I BASIC DATA - 1989 ! ,.. .n - �� E .ro r..1.I!m „4 N \ Pan J-=•-------- --- ---- �_ �' ,.Ih ,� I / WO I.ua4,Y,{ l m:!U\° P At 1 r� L -c-7Z.2 ein8 ®yam/ W pp�� E - TONG " ® ' Z P� 1980 PO��i'.J t C�z e... e.. 1.a'q 1.����41.,a .,�DEEPaP VEp® S T' �_ 3716 e LEGEND 1 ) „,F°',p..�� i GREENWOOD ;. r �� ,•�, af"� v a 1980 POP.653 r INTERSTATE TRUNK HIGHWAY )5 _CI Wiz ” I�©• ! ^'.. ymw H.yr - U.S. TRUNK HIGHWAY 10 /" n� "wy�, ��^ d 0��®,s .w„ ® �°`° � a'0�' ?� ��,C� STATE TRUNK HIGHWAY / �/�:J s3 , /'`,ry ? 3 p COUNTY STATE AID HIGHWAY =7 p ,1 I �....o. Win - � - s•''°� �� COUNTY ROAD .. ti1� "..®.>aam— •,m, rEXCEI IORSs,. j)` 44 0 CORPORATE LIMITS ti.+....,i {V,'a p2 ca.' a. K`.• 'y1'V." .•4/J im""•• *•.k1 . *� PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE ..-. R 4�4.'Q6d r..�µW�,".CO `(1. ��� ��m. � r \gga run l' ,r..oa a dD� °- `\ eV- V 4W^ �'Cr1�f����� • . I 4 ,a•n Cliy 1 .f�•. ',,f Y K er _ • �° 4)7. z a ..," r.n. 4 3 3 '4,,,6 '.{��'pp G��_.+j�,1 ,(lj' ����.t , 1:." ,9 <t E,..a .,.m. I ' ,�.I/ID F es p I .. �+01..4.' p" a 9 ..4 0° ' d • 4 S Y t:,gs _ p' a ®/ LL "." MN me ,f'°°'q d 3 t' • n. „} ': T ��°' © .°of 1`° '"°; °g"°'N p •�A� w. ! o wa +' ::: °_ ♦ G.I ".,::,, , itui Irpoligro gg .6. 8 06 was•,.ay� ©1-a. �, 1,1 )_z z), ','..::.:;' i . A Win. 1„,..440 . �. "'. '° 0 Yl."a l�ai -9• p y r.n.1 Y 7• • ,�w gl k '4 nw.mm n1 t 'ua.fmt ta� 3 , c��y,7 . _ . � a 1 .. . ... V” m..,'s a�Qa i i C Y�. ."9„:.400~� s a �� t '� in .,C318,811 Vic... ffir.,1,...V. .P,, � e� tr ` ib r ad-i `�1 IN ailtwtruir..,...\ %....... ,,,,„e.... ..tie , [ i•F■ 0 ........‘ e ,y r° r/y „4. Heritage Carnelian 0, 4 • Road Lane �:8.8©� Dakota C•. .'� v. um: a pl , 1 .0. p 6�f.� Avenue\ •(mil I ... • I1K CHANHASSEN •u+'9 a' Alk1980 POP.6759 g 1®� t, ® i n„'n u'°^a�•"Q '� n ----.../4111190norP"-- - CD 1._ ITO We' '{ ,eifip10 © 1 1 3 Q ,....... I_ mi .. + ..,.. / A 88 w 0 1 ,A10„"/ T / ~�'" EDEN PRAIRIE\+ NI L , �G y•? 1980 POP 16263 Terrey m1z P 1. e e,z • 11 4/ ine _ et.... to any IM lipi7ir L c-2: i ... .. , ,1 r Lr.f eb L LOCATION 1 L MAP vi, , ,. .._An,•..es••••‘-,• - . . -. II: IlirPROJECT IDENTIFICATION 1 This project, approximately 5 miles long, on Trunk Highway (T.H. ) 5 would improve the present undivided two-lane roadway to a four-lane divided roadway. This project also includes construction of another bridge .- over the Soo Line Railroad in Chanhassen to increase the traffic carrying capacity and safety between the four-lane sections at T.H. 41 in Chanhassen and County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 4 in Eden Prairie. Typically, a depressed median would separate the directions of traffic. Approximately 0.5 mile of new frontage road would be added south of T.H. 5 between Mitchell Lake and CSAH 4. Intersections would have additional channelization, existing signals would be improved and a new signal would be installed at W. 184th Avenue. An eight foot wide bituminous path (bikeway/bikeway) would be built along the north side of T.H. 5 from near T.H. 41 to the entrance of Lake Ann Park and from CSAH 17 to Heritage Road. An underpass near Mitchell ' Lake will be built under T.H. 5 to provide a connection for a future Eden Prairie trail from the south. An L underpass for a proposed nature trail along the most western fork of Bluff Creek (0.2 mile east of County Road 117) in Chanhassen is being considered. r I I I I I I 1 _ I- i ' II INTRODUCTORY SUMMARY I Purpose of this This Environmental Assessment (EA) addresses features document and resources that could be impacted by this project. II It is to help the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) decide whether or not an Environmental Impact Statement II I-1 is needed. IPurposes of this The project's primary purposes are to improve traffic I project flow and increase capacity and safety. The service life of T.H. 5 in the project area would be extended. The completion of this project would provide four I lanes for traffic from T.H.41 to Interstate (I) 494 in a developing part of the metro area. Possible Impacts This project will have no significant neat" I g ive impacts on the surrounding environment. IIPotential impacts include: A. the need for approximately 40 acres of new permanent II right-of-way B. the displacement and relocation of approximately five homes and one business II C. access changes affecting approximately eight homes and one business D. construction related noise and traffic disruption E. wetland encroachment II F. flood plain encroachment G. water quality degradation 1_ H. microscale (localized) air quality degradation II I. removal of mature vegetation J. traffic induced noise increases K. aesthetics and visual quality. i_ I I I I_ I L I I 2 II L 11 I 1� irPROJECT DEVELOPMENT PATH Path Selected A moderate level path has been selected for this project because of the need for additional right- of-way, including business and residential reloca- tions, access changes and the potential for minor adverse environmental effects. Federal Action In accordance with 23 CFR Part 771, pages 31-54, Determination the proposed improvements to T.H. 5 will be pur- l" sued as a Class III action requiring the prepara- tion of an environmental assessment. A Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) by the FHWA will be 11 requested if no potential significant environmental impacts are identified for the Environmental Impact Statement Need Decision. State This project is being reviewed through the Alter- Enviroiunental native State Environmental Review Process proposed Review by Mn/DOT and adopted by the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (MEQB) on August 18, 1983. The project meets or exceeds a mandatory EAW threshold category under Minnesota Rules 4410.4300, subp. 22. This Environmental Assessment has been prepared in accor- dance with the Alternative Review Process and is being circulated for review and comment to the re- quired MEQB distribution list and made available for public review and comment. Following a 30 day comment period, a decision on the need for a State Environ- mental Impact Statement on the project will be issued. Minnesota In accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding with Intergovernmental the Metropolitan Council, this project is subject to Review Process review through the Minnesota Intergovernmental Review Process. This Environmental Assessment will be dis- tributed to everyone on the Environmental Assessment Worksheet distribution list. I I- I IL 3 I II I- TIME SCHEDULE II EA approval (Mn/DOT & FHWA) September 1988 I- State Historical Preservation Officer December 1988 II clearance, Opportunity for Public Hearing October 1988 II Layout approval (Mn/DOT staff) Carver/Hennepin County Line to CSAH 4 June 1988 I- CSAH 17 to Carver/Henn. County Line August 1988 II T.H. 41 to CSAH 17 September 1988 IEnvironmental Impact Statement Need January 1989 II Decision Final plans completed (by consultant) March 1989 Anticipated letting II CSAH 17 to CSAH 4 June 1989 1 T.H. 41 to CSAH 17 November 1991 I Construction I. CSAH 17 to CSAH 4 IIStart Summer 1989 Complete Autumn 1990 T.H. 41 to CSAH 17 _ Start Spring 1991 II Complete Autumn 1992 FUNDING The estimated costs of the proposed improvements are II as follows: 1_ CSAH 17 to CSAH 4 $ 6,100,000 II T.H. 41 to CSAH 17 $ 4,000,000 I_ It is anticipated that 76. 74% of this total will be I funded with Federal Aid Primary Funds. The remaining 23.26% will be funded with State monies. This project I_ is on Federal Aid Primary Route 14. II PROJECT MANAGER The designated project manager for this project is: I_ Evan R. Green, Transportation Planning II Minnesota Department of Transportation 2055 North Lilac Drive L Golden Valley, Minnesota 55422 II I II 4 i II [_ II 1i PROJECT DESCRIPTION IF Project T.H. 5 traverses in an easterly/westerly direction Area an area of gently rolling terrain containing numer- ous isolated wetland basins, many lakes and some shallow creeks. Between T.H. 41 and Audubon Road, T.H. 5 passes by mostly farmland (some of it farmed) , agricultural type residences, a mini-golf course, and passes over two forks of Bluff Creek. T.H. 5, going east of Audubon Road to CSAH 4, passes over Riley Creek. passes by Lake Ann Park, commercial buildings, light industrial facilities, suburban residences, and skirts Mitchell Lake. West of the project area is the University of Minne- sota Arboretum, Carver Park Reserve, and the free- standing growth centers of Victoria and Waconia. East of the project area has been mostly developed into commercial buildings, industry and public services. Existing T.H. 5 is classified as a minor arterial highway. Facilities In the project area, it is posted for a speed limit of 55 miles per hour and is predominately a rural design consisting of two 12 foot traffic lanes with shoulders that vary in width (6 to 10 feet) and composition (bituminous or gravel) . The existing highway between T.H. 41 and the east Carver County line was first hard surfaced in 1945 , then regraded and hard surfaced in 1951, then in 1964 a bypass which included Bridge 10009 was built south of downtown Chanhassen. The portion between the west Hennepin County line and CSAH 4 was first graded and hard surfaced in 1938, regraded and hard surfaced in 1950, and had base repair and hard surfacing in 1958. Various repair, maintenance and safety projects have occurred since major work in 1964, but the overall existing design features are for geometric standards and traffic of 25 to 35 years ago. ISignals At T.H. 41, CSAH 17, T.H. 101 and Dakota Avenue, the intersections are signalized and channelized with raised islands. Turn bays or free rights are provided and there are left turn signals for the mainline traffic. Turn Lanes There are right turn lanes at most of the non- signalized intersections. 1 5 ir I II 1 Bridge 10009 The current bridge over •the Soo Line R/R was inspected II this spring (1988) . see page 20 in the appendix. Con- dition ratings ranged from good to generally good (' (potential exists for minor maintenance see page 20) . 11 i This bridge was first built in 1964 and remodeled (newer, wider deck) in 1978. 1 Bicycle/ Chanhassen has a bituminous path on the north side of I Pedestrian T.H. 5 from the entrance to Lake Ann Park to the in- Facilities tersection of CSAH 17 and CSAH 16 (W. 79th St. ) . IIf In Eden Prairie. there is an eight foot wide bituminous path from Heritage Road to 500 feet east of Carnelian FLane. An eight foot wide off-road bikeway was built II along CSAH 4 using a Mn/DOT bikeways grant. Eight foot bituminous shoulders were added to T.H. 41 II north of T.H. 5 for an on-road bikeway. Traffic Traffic counts (1986) indicate that the average number of vehicles using T.H. 5 daily is 12,500 near T.H. 41 II to 20,500 near CSAH 4. IA consulting engineering firm prepared a report, TH II 212 TRAFFIC FORECASTS From 1-494 to Norwood/Young America - August 1985, for Mn/DOT. The Build TH 212 alternative assumes transportation improvements, such Ias the Shakopee bypass and a new CR J8 Minnesota River I/ Crossing, identified in Metropolitan Council's Year 2000 Transportation Policy Plan. In the year 2005 I anticipated traffic will be from 19. 100 (east of T.H. 41) to 28,600 (west of Heritage Road) to 25.600 (west II of CSAH 4) vehicles per day on this segment of T.H. 5. See page 45. Projecting to the year 2010 the antici- pated traffic is 23.500 (east of T.H. 41) to 33. 700 II (west of Dakota Avenue) to 29,000 (west of CSAH 4) r__ vehicles per day. NEED FOR The primary objectives of the project are improved traf- 11 PROJECT fic flow, more capacity, enhanced safety. and moderni- zation of the existing highway. Two through lanes for each direction of traffic, with separation for each ' direction of traffic, would accommodate present and antic- 1... ipated increases in future traffic. T.H. 5 useful service life, actual pavement life and rideability would be II improved and extended by the modernization. IThe present bridge over the Soo Line R/R is in generally II good condition (only minor maintenance potential see page 20) but will only accommodate two lanes of traffic safely L - without major reconstruction. Thus another bridge will he II needed. I- b II L I IF To link up with existing systems, an eight foot wide bituminous path would be needed from T.H. 41 to the Lake Ann Park entrance and CSAH 17 to Heritage Road. I r A pedestrian underpass would be built under T.H. 3 j near Mitchell Lake for proposed hikeway/bikeways in Eden Prairie. This is consistent with state bikeway I I plans. An underpass for a proposed nature trail -clung the most western fork of Bluff Creek is under consideration. ' Safety During 1987, 104 accidents occurred on T.H. 5 between T.H. 41 and CSAH 4. A 49% reduction in accidents could be expected from the reconstruction to a four Iflane divided roadway (see page 21 in the appendix) . Reduced potential for non-motorized movements conflicting with motor vehicles would result from the off-road bike- ways and pedestrian underpass(es) linking the existing and proposed trails. ' Project This project is listed in the Highway Improvement Work Selection Program. Fiscal Years: 1988-1991. Projects are selected by utilization of technical data and analysis to face ' key issues and challenges of Minnesota's roadway network. ALTERNATIVES There is no suitable parallel route. A new alignment CONSIDERED would require right-of-way that is not consistent with land use plans of local governments (see City Involvement, p. 8) and the delay in improvements is contrary to the efforts of the Southwest Transportation Coalition (see Public Involvement. p. 9) . A no-build would not alleviate increasing traffic congestion or improve traffic safety in a developing suburban area. Continued maintenance performed will only slow the decrease in rideability and load carrying capacity of the roadway. The basic design features of the highway will not be improved Non-motorized movements conflicting with motorized vehicles will probabi■ increase accident potential. This is not consistent with the plans of Chanhassen, Eden Prairie. Hennepin County, Carter County or Metropolitan Council. Building a tour-Line dit ided roadway with an eight toot bituminous path is consistent c,ith the plans of local governments. There would be improved traffic flow and safer Havel. • 7 I I II PUBLIC AND AGENCY INVOLVEMENT , Public Hearing An opportunity for public hearing is planned for October 1988. Affected property owners will be notified by the cities 11 of Chanhassen and Eden Prairie for public involvement purposes. fCity Involvement Eden Prairie is being requested this August to approve the preliminary layout plan for the portion in their city. This fall, Chanhassen will be requested to ap- prove the preliminary plans for T.H. 5 in their city. Both cities strongly endorse an improved T.H. 5. Up- grading T.H. 5 is consistent with each city's compre- hensive plan and Chanhassen's Downtown Redevelopment Plan. Mn/DOT has had meetings with Chanhassen and Eden Prairie. Both cities main concern has been "can T.H. 5 be fixed sooner." An Eden Prairie proposed frontage road has been added to the plans as requested. A pedestrian underpass under T.H. 5 near Mitchell Lake has been added to the plans to provided safer access from the eight foot bit- uminious path on the northside of T.H. 5 to a proposed hikeway/bikeway going south from T.H. 5. ' Mn/DOT has and will continue to meet with Chanhassen concerning their Downtown Redevelopment Plan and their suggested revisions of intersections and access. ' I L L 1 L 8 County The proposed improvements should not have any adverse Involvement effects on either county's plans. See further discussion - 4 under Carver County and Hennepin County on page 10. Railroad The Soo Line Railroad will have opportunity to review Involvement this report. Public Major roadway improvements in the southwestern metro Involvement area are being actively promoted by the Southwest Cor- __ � I ridor Transportation Coalition. The Coalition consists Oh of public officials, private businesses and private groups. • I The cities of Chanhassen, Chaska, Eden Prairie and Waconia, along with 14 private companies, made con- tributions to the Coalition for providing assistance to accelerate T.H. 5 improvements. Minnesota's Trans- portation Commissioner Leonard Levine, in March 1988, accepted an offer of assistance from the Coalition. Chanhassen and Eden Prairie strongly support the i efforts of this coalition. Permits Required The proposed improvements will require permits from the Riley, Purgatory, Bluff Creek Watershed District. The Mitchell Lake type III wetland is a protected wet- land and will require a Minnesota Department of Natural Resources' (Mn/DNR) Protected Waters Permit and an U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Section 404-permit. A consult- tant engineering firm is responsible for having the per- mits issued to Mn/DOT. The consultant is also respons- ible for any clearances needed from the DNR or the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. There will be further detail in the Design Study Report. Associated In addition to what has been included so far, the fol- Planning & lowing is a discussion of some plans and/or projects Projects associated with this segment of T.H. 5. Metropolitan The project east of CSAH 17 is within Metropolitan Council Council's Metro Urban Services Area (MUSA) . West of CSAH 17, T.H. 5 crosses out of the MUSA but then re- enters a portion of the MUSA two miles west of T.H. 41. The proposed improvements are consistent with Metropolitan Council' s "Transportation Guide/Policy Plans. " I 9 I- II I- Carver County Their THOROUGHFARE PLAN anticipates T.H. 5 from Waconia 11 east to the county line being a principal arterial for Fthe county beyond the year 1990. Hennepin County Hennepin County Department of Transportation has devel- II oped a project to channelize CSAH 4 at T.H. 5 concur- ,- rently with work of S.P. 2701-24. The improvements on T.H. 5 are consistent with county plans. S.P. 1002-49 T.H. 5 from T.H. 25 to T.H. 41 (approximately 14 miles) r will be milled and overlaid the summer of 1989 to prevent II 1 loss of pavement structure until possible reconstruction in the 1990's. I S.P.2701-24 T.H. 5 from the east limits of the proposed project, in ', this report, to Prairie Center Drive is now being made 1 into a four lane divided facility along with associated II improvements for increased capacity. T.H. 212 A major upgrading and realignment of T.H. 212 has been 1 under discussion since the early 1950's. The upgrading II is an element of the Metropolitan Council's "Transpor- tation Guide/Policy Plan" and various environmental 1 studies have been undertaken. I Several alternative alignments have been studied for a four-lane divided freeway between Cologne and 1-494. IIProposed T.H. 5 improvements will not unduly favor or Preclude the selection of any T.H. 212 alignments being studied. I_ Pedestrian/Bicycle The Mn/DOT Statewide Bikeway Plan (August 1987) recom- Plans & Projects mends an off-road bikeway along T.H. 5 from T.H. 41 to Prairie Center Drive to provide a ". . . backbone route II through the southwestern metro . . ." to link short local systems and provide a major east/west route where ,, bicycle travel is presently difficult. 1._ There are proposed trails for Chanhassen (see page 26 26) - and hikeway/bikeways in Eden Prairie (see page 27) that would be linked by this portion of the "backbone route" II J . constructed by this project. LAn underpass would be built under T.H. 5 near Mitchell II Lake. An underpass for a proposed nature trail along the most western fork of Bluff Creek is being considered. LAn 8' wide bituminous path is built along the north side , I of T.H. 5 from Martin Drive to Prairie Center Drive and planned between CSAH 4 & Martin Drive under S.P.2701-24. L II 10 II 1i IF Conclusions The project as documented in this report is not de- i pendent or in conflict with other projects or plans. It aggrandizes S.P.2701-24 and would complete a "back- bone route" of the Mn/DOT Statewide Bikeway Plan. The I F plans of Chanhassen and Eden Prairie are dependent on this project. SOCIAL, ECONOMIC All social, economic and environmental impacts and IF & ENVIRONMENTAL effects discussed herein apply only to the upgrading IMPACTS of T.H. 5 as identified in this report. Access Control It is proposed that access to the upgraded facility will be partially controlled. Access to individual parcels will be provided via existing streets and/or newly con- structed frontage roads as needed. The home at 17450 on T.H. 5 would have its access moved • from the highway to Heritage Road. Homes on the south side of T.H. 5 between Mitchell Lake and Terrey Pine Drive would have their access changed from the highway to a new frontage road connected to Terrey Pine Drive and at T.H. 5 across from Heritage Road. Although every effort will be made to maintain uninter- rupted access to all affected properties, the antici- pated increases in traffic congestion and the require- ments of construction staging will adversely impact accessibility to all properties along T.H. 5 to some degree during various phases of the construction opera- tions. These impacts will range from merely nuisance to moderately adverse. Any avoidable interruptions in 11 access will be of short duration. Due to increased traffic capacity and safety resulting fa from the proposed improvements, the net effect on overall accessibility to surrounding properties will be positive. Aesthetics No significant adverse aesthetics impacts are anticipated II_ because the project will not significantly change the existing alignment or its appurtenances. The improved access, signing, signals and vegetation will remove some of the general jumble that has occurred. The aesthetic and visual quality considerations will be fur- ther addressed in the Design Study Report. 1 , 1 11 II I- Air Quality An Indirect Source Permit will not be required. Minne- sota State Regulations APC 19 requires an Indirect II Source Permit for "any modified highway project which r will increase average annual daily traffic volume by II t/ 10,000 or more vehicles per day within ten years after completion of the modification. " The greatest antici- pated ten year increase in average annual daily traffic II I- volume after any segment's completion is 7,300 vehicles per day. fAn adjacent project, S.P.2701-24, has higher volumes II than this project and higher probable impact. Two receptors for S.P.2701-24 were at the southwest quad- [ rant of T.H. 5 and CSAH 4, near to the east limits of II the project in this document. Analysis results were under the one hour and the eight hour maximum allowable Federal and Minnesota Standards for carbon monoxide. III Analysis was performed at the most critically located receptor after the project finish. Analysis results Iwere under allowable standards for carbon monoxide. II See pages 22-24. Bicycles & Non-motorized travel will be enhanced by the off-road IPedestrians bikeways to be built along the north side of T.H. 5 (see II display on page 29) . See also pages 26-28, Safety on page 7 and Pedestrian/Bicycle Plans & Projects on page 10. I 'Special ramped sidewalk will be included at appropriate II locations to accommodate bicycles and the handicapped Iwhere there is construction of curb And gutter. II Construction No unique construction concerns have been discovered. Impacts, Excess Standard noise, dust and erosion control specifications Materials will be followed by the contractor(s) . No detours, II excess material disposal or borrow site problems are 4 . anticipated. IErosion This project will result in some potential for erosion S -. since ground cover will be disturbed. Erosion control measures will be undertaken in accordance with Mn/DOT IL Standard Specifications 1803.5, 2573 and special pro- ' visions. All disturbed areas will be reseeded or sodded. I Economics The proposed project is not expected to cause any adverse I effect to businesses other than the one being displaced. Businesses view the proposed improvements as positive. See Public Involvement, page 9. II I • 1 12 L II L I Ii II- I Endangered Species In accordance with the Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 as amended (16 USC 1531-1543) , the Mn/DOT wildlife biologist has determined that the proposed project will not have an adverse affect on threatened or endangered species because it is not located within the breeding or wintering range of any such species, as given in the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Red Book. The Minnesota Natural Heritage Program (a unit within Mn/DNR) review indicated no known occurrences of rare species or significant natural features in or near the T.H. 5 corridor. This unit has compiled the most complete single source of data on Minnesota's rare, endangered or otherwise significant plant and animal species, plant com- munities and other natural features. Farmlands No prime, unique, statewide or local important farmland will be required by this project (see pages 30 & 31) . The approximately 13 acres of farmland being acquired will not significantly affect the agricultural lands, operations or production adjacent to it. Flood Plains There will be minor encroachments into three flood plains. See page 32. Detail hydraulic analysis is being done. 'Effects will be included in the Design Study Report. No significant increased risk of flooding or interrupting routes for emergency vehicles and evacuation is expected. Groundwater, Potential for geological and hydrogeologic effects are, Geology or and will be considered, but due to the nature of the Earthborn planned work and the affected environment, no significant Vibrations impacts are anticipated. Hazardous Wastes There are no known sites of hazardous waste disposal in �- the area. Soil borings will be made near a service station in the northeast quadrant of T.H. 101 & T.H. 5 for evidence I of petroleum products in the soil. Potential spills of hazardous substances are not anticipated to present unique problems. Historical, The State Historical Preservation Offi _er in March 1988 Archaeological The requested to review the proposed project. The results or Cultural Sites will probably be available December 1988. The closest site listed on the National Register of His- toric Places, Minnesota Checklist (1983) is Chanhassen ITown Hall - well outside the project limits. Land Use The project is consistent with local and regional com- prehensive plans. (See Associated Planning & Projects beginning on page 9. ) IF 13 Noise This project is considered to be a Type 1 project (a proposed federal or federal-aid highway project for the II construction of a highway on a new location or the I- physical alteration of an existing highway which signifi- cantly changes either horizontal or vertical alignment or increases the number of through traffic lanes) as defined I- in the Federal-Aid Highway Program Manual (FHPM) 7-7-3. I A noise analysis for this project was performed and is included on pages 33-38 in the appendix of this report. I This project will be in compliance with FHWA Noise Abate- -- meat Criteria (NAC) . 1 For the analysis, the project was divided into twelve areas. _ II Four areas will be in compliance with the Minnesota Pollu- tion Control Agency (MPCA) daytime standards. Eight areas I that will exceed daytime standards are as follows: Area Land Use Number dBA over standard 1 N-2 Residential 1 5 II N-3 Motel 1 4 N-4 Commercial 2 0-3 1 Commercial 4 0-2 N-S Residential 1 3 / , S-1 ' Residential 1 0-5 • S-3 Church 1 0-1 II S-4 Residential 6 0-1 S-6 Residential 5 0-3 Nine areas that will exceed MPCA nighttime standards are II as follows: I_ Area Land Use Number dBA over standard I N-1 Residential 2 1-3 il N-2 Residential 1 8-11 N-3 Motel 1 10-11 II N-S Residential 3 4 Residential 1 9 N-6 Residential 5 0-4 II S-1 Residential 2 4-11 S-4 Residential 6 3-7 S-5 Residential 2 1-5 II S-6 Residential 5 4-10 LConstructing noise barriers in these areas is ineEfect.ive II or unfeasible due to gaps in walls for access and adequate sight distance for motorists entering T.H. 5. II L 14 II L I i The benefit to cost ratio does not economically justify constructing noise barriers. All areas will experience about the same noise levels with either the "build" or "no-build" . See table N-3 on page 39. Construction activities are expected to last approxi- mately two to three construction seasons. Although no one area should be exposed to construction noise for the full two to three years, each area will probably be impacted during each of those years. Throughout the project length, activities such as pile driving, earth moving, trucks hauling, and grading operations will contribute to con- struction noise impact. The Minnesota Standard Specifi- fications for Highway Construction, Section 7, Subsection 1701, states, in part, that the contractor shall comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, regulations, orders, and decrees in the performance of the construction. This includes any local noise laws. Right-of-way The proposed improvements would require approximately 40 acres of new permanent right-of way. Five homes and one business would be displaced. Five lots would be acquired and strips of other properties would be required along T.H. 5. There will be permanent access changes for seven homes. Parks and The project has been reviewed for potential 4(f) involve- Recreational .went. The project will not use any publicly owned parklands, Areas waterfowl or wildlife refuges, recreational areas or any other property determined to be subject to the provisions of 4(f) . Therefore, there are no 4(f) involvements. The project has been reviewed for potential 6(f) involve- ments. The project will not use any outdoor recreational land acquired, planned or developed with LAWCON funds. As a result, 6(f) does not apply. 11_ Lake Ann Park is adjacent to the project. but the proposed improvements will not negatively impact the park. The eight foot bituminous path will enhance non-motorized recreational travel and access to Lake Ann Park. Relocations The Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) is required by both state and federal law to provide prompt and equitable relocation services and payments to all I persons and businesses displaced by State or Federal Aid highway construction. 1 15 I I The Golden Valley District Office has a well trained and experienced relocation staff to provide these services. The district office is relatively accessible to the proj- ect so all relocation contacts will originate from there. Residents and the business will be informed of their eligibility to receive payments such as moving expenses, appraisal fees, housing supplements, closing costs, interest differentials, etc. These payments and the eligibility requirements to receive them are explained in the booklet entitled "Relocation Assistance" which will be available to all interested parties. As the time nears for w"negotiations g with landowners, the relocation staff will personally contact and counsel all occupants of the affected residences and business con- cerning their potential relocation benefits. No disadvantaged or especially sensitive groups or indi- viduals have been identified. Furthermore, no significant problems in obtaining reasonable replacement property, within the community, for residential or business dis- placements are anticipated. Social As the proposed project is an upgrading of an inplace facility, with only minor access changes. no significant effect on community cohesion is anticipated. No particu- larly sensitive group(s) will be unduly impacted. Controversy Nothing significant has been noted against the improve- ' ments so far. The comment that arises frequently is, "can it be done sooner. " The negative comment, "I hate to drive Highway 5" is a campaign to accelerate the up- - grade of T.H. 5. Traffic The major traffic effects of proposed improvements on the communities referred to in this report relate to changes in traffic speeds and congestion during con- , struction. Due to lack of adequate parallel routes, it is anticipated that the majority of current T.H. 5 vehicular traffic will continue to use T.H. 5 during the construction period. The reduction in traffic speeds, and probable resulting increased congestion, are unavoidable 11 consequences of driving through major : onstruction zones. The contractor(s) will be required to conduct operations so as to minimize obstructions of traffic and provide for the safety of the general public in accordance with sec- tion 1707 of the Minnesota Standard Specifications for Highway Construction. Provisions for possible alternate routing of emergency vehicles during various construction operations would be coordinated with the local authorities It is anticipated that one lane of traffic in each direction will be maintained. 16 • L IIIFContractors) must abide by criteria in the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. II Transit The Southwest Metropolitan Transit Commission contracts five morning and five afternoon express buses (route 53J) on T.H. 5. The project should not impede transit operations more than the other traffic. Vegetation Some mature vegetation will be removed as necessitated by construction. All disturbed areas will be seeded or sodded to prevent erosion. Reasonable efforts will be made to prevent loss of character or unique landscape features. The Mn/DOT forester is involved with an inven- 't tory of trees and possible transplants of trees (see pages 39-41) . As the project develops, removals by devel- opers, changes in condition of vegetation, new land- ,I soaping. comments, etc. , will be duly noted and included. See also Mitigation on page 18. Wildlife A listing of reported animal hits was reviewed and about I t one animal hit per mile per year has occurred. Compared to other problem areas in the state, this is not a high enough number of animals hit per year to warrant the I linstallation of structural measures such as deer reflectors to reduce deer kills. The project will have minor effect on some marginal wildlife habitat. Any on-site wetland mitigation would probably be positive for wildlife as the developments east of Audubon Road are reducing the available wildlife habitat. Water Quality There will be an increase in runoff :'-te to more imper- vious surface area. A consultant ha. been hired to determine needs for drainage, which could include ease- ments or purchases for ponding areas. Much of this project is rural design. Rural drainage systems allow = pollutants to settle or be absorbed by the soil and vegetation. None of the drainage will be introduced to new water bodies. No significant impacts on water quality are expected. Wetlands Most of the wetlands in the project area are shallow cattail areas. A list of wetlands re\ iewed are listed on page 42 and their general Location noted on page 43 . Only thiee acres are elpected to be impacted. The type III wetland north of Mitchell Lake is being impacted to protect the more valuable resource, '1 tchell Lake. IThe possibility of on-site mitigation is being investi- gated. Mitigation will be further detailed in the Design Study Report. any impacts not mitigated by on-site mea- sures will be debited towards the District's Wetland Hab- bitat Mitigation account. i 17 I II Synergistic_ Associated Planning & Projects beginning on page 9 discussed II Effects of associated plans. Those plans have their own effects which Associated would not create any negative synergistic effect by their Planning completion or deletion. They also do not affect the need for II constructing the proposed improvements. Projects underway, this proposed project, and planned projects are not expected Irto create significant development or traffic on T.H. 5, but II accommodate current and planned development. Mitigation Mn/DOT is hereby committed to the following measures to Ir minimize adverse effects of the proposed improvements: I A. Accessibility IAny unavoidable construction related interruptions II of access will be kept to the minimum duration as practicable. B. Utilities II All efforts will be made to keep any necessary inter- ruptions in utility service to a practical minimum. C. Public Safety/Emergency Services I I Provisions for possible alternate routing of emergency vehicles during various construction operations will be coordinated with the local officials. II D. Right-of-Way a Prompt and equitable relocation services and payments II will be provided to all displaced persons and busi- nesses. IAny partial taking of a property for this project will II be negotiated in a reasonable, practical manner. E. Upland Vegetation II Reasonable efforts will be made to save or restore disturbed vegetation. During final design, consideration will be given to design concepts. IIF. Wetland mitigation will be further defined as the pro- ject progresses. I_ On-site mitigation is being investigated. The excess II debits from on-site mitigation will be nominated to the District's Wetland Mitigation Banking Account. II G. Design continuity will be part of the design process. 18 ' 1- II L II ‘ . CITY OF vk'sf CUANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Gary Warren, City Engineer FROM: Jo Ann Olsen, Asst. City Planner?/40 DATE: November 2 , 1988 ' SUBJ: Environmental Assessment for Highway 5 from T.H. 41 to Heritage Road The following are my comments on the Environmental Assessment: 1 . On page 9 where it states "Permits Required" , it should also ' state that they will have to receive wetland alteration per- mits from the City of Chanhassen. ' 2 . On page 17 dealing with vegetation: The City Council is con- sidering a tree removal ordinance which would require a per caliper replacement of trees removed. Under wetlands on that ' same page it should be mentioned again that they will receive any wetland alteration permits required by the City. I II 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I