1. TH 101 Improvements: Project Update 11-14-2011uC�Iff OF
CHMNSEN MEMORANDUM
7700 Market Boulevard TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
PO Box 147 )
Chanhassen, MN 55317 FROM: Paul Oehme, Dir. of Public Works/City Engineer
Administration DATE: November 14, 2011
Phone: 952.227.1100 dy
Fax: 952.227.1110 SUBJ: Project Update
Building Inspections TH 101 Improvements, Lyman Boulevard to Pioneer Trail
Phone: 952.227.1180 City Project PW67F4a
Fax: 952.227.1190
Engineering
BACKGROUND
Phone: 952.227.1160
Fax: 952.227.1170
Over the past year, staff has been working with representatives of MnDOT and
Finance
Carver County to identify a preferred design for the reconstruction of TH 101
Phone: 952.227.1140
between Lyman Boulevard (CSAH 18) and Pioneer Trail (CSAH 14). TH 101 is
Fax: 952.227.1110
proposed to be reconstructed to improve safety and plan for future growth. The intent
is to have all preliminary design and environmental reviews and approvals for the
Park & Recreation
project completed in 2011 to allow final design to proceed in 2012.
Phone: 952.227.1120
Fax: 952.227.1110
The construction is proposed to be financed primarily through Federal Transportation
Recreation Center
Funding secured through the 2009 regional solicitation process. As a result of the
2310 Coulter Boulevard
scope of the proposed improvements and the Federal funding, the preparation of an
Phone: 952.227.1400
Environmental Assessment/Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA/EAW) is
Fax: 952.227.1404
required to review the potential environmental impacts of the project.
The EA/EAW process required a public hearing be held to allow for public comment
Planning &
Natural Resources
regarding the accuracy of the EA/EAW document and the potential for the project to
g g Y p p J
Phone: 952.227.1130
have significant impacts. The public hearing was held on August 8, 2011.
Fax: 952.227.1110
A number of comments were received for the project at the public hearing and
Public Works
through the EA/EAW public comment process. All comments provided either in
7901 Park Place
writing during the public comment period or at the public hearing must be considered
Phone: 952.227.1300
and the EA/EAW document must be updated to address any substantive comments.
Fax: 952.227.1310
The comments have been addressed and the EA/EAW has been updated. The
Senior Center
EA/EAW has been approved by MnDOT and the FHWA. The Council will be asked
Phone: 952.227.1125
to approve the final document and make a determination of whether the project has
Fax: 952.227.1110
significant environmental impacts. Staff is planning to ask the Council to make this
final determination for the project on December 12, 2011.
Web Site
www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us
A copy of the draft Environmental Assessment Update and Request for Finding of No
Significant'Impact for the project is attached. This document includes responses to
the substantive comments received through the EA/EAW process.
g:\eng\pub1ic\pw67f4aeath 101 lyman to pioneer\111411 bkgd th 101 work session 11_2 11 (2).doc
Chanhassen is a Community for Life -Providing for Today and Planning for Tomorrow
Todd Gerhardt
TH 101 Improvements (Lyman to Pioneer): Project Update
November 7, 2011
Page 2
The anticipated schedule for the project is as follows:
Neighborhood Meeting
City Council Approve Final EA/EAW
Preliminary Design Complete
Final Design
Right-of-Way/Easement Acquisition
Construction
DISCUSSION
December 1, 2011
December 12, 2011
December, 2011
2012
2012
2013/2014
Modifications have been made to the preliminary project design in response to the various comments
received through the EA/EAW review process. These changes are as follows:
• A stormwater pond originally planned to be constructed along the east side of TH 101 just south
of 961h Street is instead proposed be constructed in the northwest corner of the TH 101 and
Pioneer Trail intersection. This change is proposed to reduce tree removals and impacts to
properties along the east side of TH 101; however, it does result in some additional wetland
impacts and will need to be approved by the environmental oversight agencies.
• The preliminary design for the pedestrian underpass at Bandimere Park has been changed to
move the west end of the underpass further south to help reduce impacts to the property owner
along the west side of TH 101.
A copy of the updated project layout is attached illustrating these changes. The project design will
continue to be refined through the final design process.
Two other frequent comments received through the EA/EAW review process included concerns
regarding the amount of tree removal and the need for the roadway to be expanded from two lanes to
four lanes. These concerns are addressed in the EA/EAW response to comments document.
Additional information on these items will be provided to the Council at the work session.
The City submitted a Metro Municipal Agreement Grant application to MnDOT for this project on
July 29, 2011. The application requested $702,000 in funding for improvements at the TH 101 and
Pioneer Trail intersection. Staff is waiting to hear whether our application was successful. If the
City is unsuccessful in obtaining this funding, the improvements to the intersection of Pioneer Trail
intersection my need to be delayed.
Staff and the consulting team will provide the Council with an overview of the updated project
design and review the responses to the various EA/EAW comments at the work session.
Attachments: Environmental Assessment Update & Request for Finding of No Significant Impact
Updated Project Layout
c: Bill Weckman, Carver County
Diane Langenbach, MnDOT
Jon Horn, Kimley-Horn & Associates
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT UPDATE
Ft
REQUEST FOR FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
for
SP 194-010-011
Minn Proj. No. STPX 1011(146)
Trunk Highway 101
From: CSAH 18 (Lyman Boulevard)
To: CSAH 14 (Pioneer Trail)
In The City of Chanhassen, In the County of: Carver
Section, Township, Range:
Sec. 24, 25, Twp 116N, Range 23W
Submitted pursuant to 42 USC 4332
by the
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION and
City of Chanhassen
for
Reconstruction of approximately 1 mile of an existing 2 lane roadway into a 4 lane
divided highway with pedestrian and bicycle facilities.
Recommended:
City Engineer
Reviewed and Recommended:
District State Aid Engineer
Approved:
Date
Date
State Aid Engineer Date
State Aid for Local Transportation
0
00
Kittson Roseau t
0
m
Y
f6
J
Marshall
Koochiching
Pennington
Beltrami
Cook
Red Lake
Polk
Lake
St. Louis
co
a�
U
Itasca
Norman Mahnomen
Hubbard
Clay Becker
Cass
m
a
Crow Wing Aitkin
Carlton
ca
Wilkin Otter Tail
Pine
Todd
Morrison
Grant Douglas
0 anabe
Traverse
Benton
Big Stone Stevens Pope Stearns
Isanti
$
Sherburne
'6
0
Swift
Anoka
:c
U
Kandiyohi Meeker
Wright
c
Lac Qui Chippewa
ms
w
Parle
HennepinR
m
McLeod
Yellow Medicine Renville
Ca e
Scoff Dakota SP 194-010-011
Sibley
Lincoln Lyon Redwood
Goodhue
Nicollet Le Sueu Rice
Brown
Wabasha
ipeston Murray Cottonwood atonwa
W
Blue Earth LsecalSteele
Dodge Olmsted Winona
Rock Nobles Jackson Martin
Faribault Freeborn
Mower Fillmore Houston
- TH 101 From CSAH 18 to CSAH 14 (SP 194-010-011)
NORTH Figure 1. Project Location
0 25 50
Miles May 2011
'J
POWER
HILL
z
PARK is
J
❑ 'a
w
� H NHA
�w HILLS
PAR
a
L-Y-MAN-B L--V•P
CI
I w
/ NDIM E BA
UNNAMED PARK
LAKE RILEY
PRESERVE cr
O
Y
i
212
—96-FH-S
i
I
I
' EXISTING
CITY TRAIL
mD I l/
PIeN'EER-TRAIL
S
EHDi 3— )D l j EMT]
- T] �aP
ZP
O
Q=
BLUFFCR EK BLUFF CREEK .
PARK
_, oR
G�GVFY,
_pRopM
ED REGIONA!'TR'Alb
0 0
RICE LAKE
TH 101 From CSAH 18 to CSAH 14 (SP 194-010-011)
NORTH
0 0.15 0.3 Figure 2. Project Vicinity
Mlles Section: 24, 25, Township 116N, Range 23W
May 2011
SY
�qrf
.,FTF'o
F.4
u e* t a.' � M
•,.!
F> ty
f•
� n
W
lle4�
v
.., `bM:� bb •`� Yam.+.9 .-e� �... _.-M..•
LYMAN BLVD`'
at
^r
�; .
t J. 6
ik a r�.�.
..fi�rr � s. � • �i+�
HILLY
o xOSr 4r r . OVL
^ , �` jo pµ /'
r �
O �w
01
t e r t
PIONEER f,2AlL �` d
4 4d At 6;« / 1 r IJ,�• mi
r
�«s � •� � � Leo e � "�, sir �;� {�„� a,,..
w x n
t 9
"P Or
dux,
y YI
Kc ` x at"` `L *+c�, ". d 't tmeS' ✓ -tf a `r y ��, <• +` ' ,,e 1. �'� > + �` , y „
eW e
s'
`r
- TH 101 From CSAH 18 to CSAH 14 (SP 194-010-011)
NORTH
0 NOR �,000 Figure 3. Existing Conditions
Feet May 2011
I. OPENING STATEMENT
This Environmental Assessment Update provides for new information regarding
the action, environmental issues, and mitigation measures since the approval
of the Draft EA/EAW on June 14, 2011 and documents the public and agency
involvement process, includes a statement that an EIS is not necessary, and
requests a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) by the FHWA.
Based on the information in the record, which is comprised of the
Environmental Assessment/Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA/EAW),
written and verbal comments received, responses to comments, and other
supporting documents, the City of Chanhassen as the Responsible
Governmental Unit (RGU) makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions.
II. PROPOSED ACTION
There are no changes to the proposed action since the EA was approved.
III. SOCIAL, ECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
There have been no changes to the social, economic or environmental impacts
as discussed in the EA.
The estimated cost split has been updated:
Total construction cost $9,000,000
Federal: $5,426,400
State: $2,773,600
Local: $ 800,000*
*Local share represents costs for sanitary sewer and water improvements. The
City is also anticipated to participate in funding 20% of the construction cost of
the trail improvements.
IV. PROPOSED MITIGATION
Based on public comment, the following summarizes changes to proposed
mitigation.
Tree replacement: The City will commit to developing a tree replacement plan
for the project, with the intent of enhancing vegetative screening of storm
water ponds and the roadway from adjacent properties.
Tunnel alignment: The City has revised the alignment in an attempt to
minimize impacts to the adjacent property on the west side of TH 101. These
impacts will continue to be reviewed as a part of the final design process.
Findings of Fact and Conclusions TH 101 (CSAH 18 to CSAH 14)
November 2011 SP 194-010-011
Storm Pond #3 Location: The southernmost storm water pond proposed for the
project has been relocated to the west side of the road to minimize impacts to
a residential property. This change will require property from two additional
property owners, however, the impacted property is poorly drained and does
not provide significant value to the property for alternate use. This change
will require an additional wetland impact (< 0.5 acres) or a variance from some
water quality standards.
V. PUBLIC HEARING REQUIREMENTS
The EA/EAW was submitted to the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board
(EQB) for public release on July 11, 2011 and circulated for review and
comments to the state EAW distribution list and other interested stakeholders
within the TH 101 corridor. A "Notice of Availability" was published in the
Minnesota EQB Monitor on June 27, 2011 (and July 26, 2011 due to interruption
of state services) for the comment period between July 11 and August 24,
2011.
These notices provided a brief description of the project, information on where
copies of the Draft EA/EAW were available, the date and location of the public
hearing and invited the public to provide comments on the project alignment
evaluated in the Draft EA/EAW. The Draft EA/EAW was made available for
public review on the project website,
http://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/serv/cip/highwayl0l.htmi , and at the
Chanhassen Public Library and City Hall.
To afford an opportunity for all interested parties, agencies, and groups to
provide comments on the proposed project, the City hosted a public hearing on
August 8th, 2011 in Chanhassen. Comments of the Draft EA/EAW were received
through August 24th, 2011. All written comments received during the comment
period as well as the comments received from the hearing were considered in
determining the potential for significant environmental impacts.
The following are attached:
Affidavit of Publication (Appendix C)
Public Hearing Transcript (Appendix Q
Other comments received (Appendix A)
Responses to all substantial comments received (Appendix B)
EA distribution list (Appendix E)
VI. RECOMMENDATION FOR FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
No changes to the project have taken place since the release of the Draft
EA/EAW, except for some mitigation measures as described above (Section IV).
Findings of Fact and Conclusions TH 101 (CSAH 18 to CSAH 14)
November 2011 SP 194-010-011
This TH 101 project extends between Lyman Boulevard (CSAH 18) and Pioneer
Trail (CSAH 14) in the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota. The existing roadway is a
2-lane undivided roadway without turn lanes and has over ten percent grades
with sharp horizontal curves. To improve traffic safety, capacity, and
connectivity issues on this segment of roadway, it is being reconstructed to a
four -lane divided section with turn lanes added at Pioneer Trail, Kiowa Trail
and 96t" Street.
The City of Chanhassen is the Responsible Government Unit (RGU) for this
project. An EAW has been prepared under 4410.100, Subp 3 (D) by the City in
cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Minnesota
Department of Transportation (MnDOT) and Carver County. The EAW was
developed in order to determine if a state Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) for the project is needed.
The FHWA has the primary responsibility for the federal EA review under the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The City of Chanhassen is the
project sponsor and federal grant applicant for the TH 101 project and will be
responsible for the construction.
The City has found that:
1. All requirements for environmental review of the proposed project have
been met.
2. The EAW and permit processes related to the project have generated
information that is sufficient to determine whether the project has the
potential for significant effects.
3. Areas where potential environmental effects have been identified are
being addressed during the detail design of the project. Mitigation will
be provided where impacts are expected to result from project
construction or maintenance. Mitigation measures are incorporated into
the project design, and have been or will be coordinated with
appropriate local and state agencies during the permit process.
4. Based on the criteria in Minnesota Rules part 4410.1700, the project
does not have the potential for significant environmental effects.
Based on the documentation of impacts in the EA and this EA Update, and the
comments received in response to the public hearing and the public comment
period, the City Council has issued a negative declaration that the project does
not have the potential for significant environmental effects, and recommends
that the Federal Highway Administration prepare a Finding Of No Significant
Impact (FONSI) for this project.
Findings of Fact and Conclusions TH 101 (CSAH 18 to CSAH 14)
November 2011 SP 194-010-011
VII. PROJECT MANAGER
City of Chanhassen
Paul Oehme, P.E.
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Phone: 952-227-1169
Findings of Fact and Conclusions
November 2011
TH 101 (CSAH 18 to CSAH 14)
SP 194-010-011 4
APPENDIX A
WRITTEN COMMENTS RECEIVED ON DRAFT EA/EAW
There were a total of 42 written comments received on the Draft EA/EAW in various formats
during the comment period. Of those, 6 comment letters were received from agencies; 35 were
citizen and association comments received via letter and e-mail; and 1 was a written petition with
17 signatures. The petition and half of the written comments included a form letter addressing
the same concerns. Additionally, 13 commentors provided verbal comments at the public hearing
on August 8th covering the same issues as presented in the written comments.
Each letter/card/e-mail that was received during the comment period was reviewed and the
individual comments were identified. The letters/cards/e-mails received were given a specific
number "code" to identify different categories of people who commented. These groups included
Agencies (Group 1), Form letters (Group 2) and other Citizen and Organization Comments
(Group 3). Each comment letter/card/e-mail was given a specific number in order to track the
number of letters/cards/e-mails received. The comments on the adequacy of the EAW within the
letters/cards/e-mails were then numbered to ensure all substantive were addressed.
AGENCIES
1. US EPA
2. Army Corps of Engineers
3. Minnesota PCA
4. Minnesota DNR
5. Metropolitan Council
6. Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek WD
7. Intentionally left blank
FORM LETTER COMMENTS
8. Michael Wise
9. Troy Risch
10. Tina Risch
11. Karen Hasse
12. Russell Hill
13. Lynn Stokke
14. Duane and Susan Hoff
15. Karen Derr
16. Jon and Colleen Radtke
17. James and Teresa Guisti
18. Harold Sievers
19. Richard Chadwick
20. Pam O'Neill
21. Delaney O'Neill
22. Petition with 17 signatures
CITIZEN/CITIZEN GROUPS
23. Douglas and Rebecca Duchon
24. William Heinlien
25. Leslie O'Halloran
26. Tammy Gorsuch
Findings of Fact and Conclusions TH 101 (CSAH 18 to CSAH 14)
November 2011 SP 194-010-011 A -1
27. Dan Horsfall
28. Thomas and Cheryl Jessen
29. Rose and Roger Novotny
30. Duke Zurek,Lake Riley Woods HOA
31. Gayle and Lois Degler
32. Rob Fugile
33. Randy and Cheryl Thiele
34. Paul Paulson
35. Kathy Horsfall
36. James Wiese
37. David Gatto
38. David Blanski
39. Darcy Loffler
40. Dave Wondra
41. Terri Byrne
42. Sharon Gatto
43. Roselee Wondra
Findings of Fact and Conclusions TH 101 (CSAH 18 to CSAH 14)
November 2011 SP 194-010-011 A -2
1.
P ne3Ash1l r�.
From: Oehme, Paul (poehme@d.chanhassen.mn.usj
Sera: Wednesday, August 24, 2011 7:44 PM
To: Horn, Jon-, Larson, Chadd
Subject: FW: EPA review of EAIEAW • Reconstruction of TH 101 between CSAH 18 (Lyman Blvd)
and CSAH 14 (Pioneer Trail)
Sent from my Motorola phone.
------Original Message Attached ------
from: "Laszewski.Virginiapepamail.epa.Itov" <Laszewski.Virginiaiiepamail.epa.gov,>
Sent: Wed Aug 24 26:07:01 CDT 2022
To : "Ph).1.Forst@dot.eov" <Phil.Forst0dot.aov> Cc : "Oehme, Paul"
<poehme0ci.chanhassen.mn.us>
Subject: EPA review of EA/EAW - Reconstruction of TH 101 between CSAH 18 (Lyman Blvd) and
CSAH 14 (Pioneer Trail)
Mr. Forst,
EPA reviewed the above referenced document. We have no major concerns with the proposal as
long as adequate mitigation measures to protect resources in the project study area are
incorporated into project design, construction and operation.
Virginia Laszewski
Environmental Scientist
US EPA, Region 5
NEPA Implementation, OECA
77 W. Jackson Blvd. (mail code: E-193)
Chicago, IL 6OW-3590
Phone: (312) 886-7501
Fax: (312) 697-2097
email: laszewski.virginiat7eoa.¢ov
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARRAY
ST. PAUL DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS
is
480 FIF1tr STRUT EAST, SURE 700
ST. PAUL MPINNESOTA $6101.1478
e��
F,
AU6 u 9 2011
ri 15 eft
Operations��
Regulatory (2011-02756-MTS)
Mr. Paul 4ehme, P.E.
City of Chanhassen
7700 Market Boulevard
Charhassen, Minnesota S5317
Dear Mr. Oehme:
We received a letter from Ms. Beth Kunkel (Kimley-liom and Associates),.datedJuly_$,
201 lwith your Environmental Assessment (EA) for the proposed Reconstruction of T14 101
between CSAH 18 (Lyman Boulevard) and CSAH 14 (Pioneer Boulevard) in Chanhassen The
project is located in Sections 24 and 25, Township 116 N., Range 23 W., Carver Courtly,
Minnesota.
We concur with your prelinvnary.assessment that a Department of the Army permit may A
be needed for this project. We look forward to receiving your request for a jurisdictional
determination and permit application
For further information, please contact Michael Sctcring at (651) 290-5396, the Corps
project manager for Carver County. In any correspondence or inquiries, please refer to the
Regulatory number shown above.
Sincerely,
Tamara E. Cameron
Chiefs Regulatory Branch
CAM,
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
s"t4%"ft W"" IsLp"saenneossus+i4t i urZ+esmo
8004srae1A l 651-2U.53S2 ttr l w xr awsak nnus l EQwrOpyawnayra pbyv
August 24, 2011
Mr. Paul Oehme, P.E.
Project Manager
City of Chanhassen
770D Market Boulevard
PO Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Re: TH 101 from CSAH 18 (Lyman Boulevard) to CSAH 14 (PioneerTrail)
Environmental Assessment Worksheet
Dear Mr. Oehme:
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Environmental Assessment Worksheet
tEAW) for the TH 101 from CSAH 18 (Lyman Boulevard) to CSAH 14 (Pioneer Trail) project (Project] in
Chanhassen, Minnesota The Project consists of the reconstruction of TH 101 from a two-lane undivided
highway to a four -lane divided highway. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) staff has reviewed
the EAW and have no comments at this time.
Please be aware that this letter does not constitute approval by the MPCA of any or all elements of the
Project for the Purpose of pending or future permit action(s) by the MPCA. Ultimately, it is the
responsibility ofthe Project proposer to secure any required permits and to comply with arw requisite
permit conditions. If you have any questions concerning our review of this EAW, please contact me at
651757.2508.
Sincerely,
Karen Kromer
Planner Principal
Environmental Review and Feedlot Section
Regional Division
KK:mbo
cc: Craig Affeldt, MPCA, St. Paul
Doug Wetzstein, MPCA, SG Paul
3.
Payne, Ashle
From: Oehme. Paul 1poehme@ci.chanhassen.mn.usj
Sent. Wednesday, August 24, 2011 7:48 PM
To: Horn, Jon; Larson, Chadd
Subject FW: Re: Trunk Highway 101 (Lyman Boulevard to Pioneer Trail) EA - DNR Comments
Sent from my Motorola phone.
---OrWal Message Attached ---•--
From: "Doperalski, Melissa (DNR)" <ge1jssa.dQperalskiCa%bte.mn.rx>
Sent: Wed Aug 24 13:50:15 CDT 2011
To: "Oehme, Paul" < >
Subject: Re: Trunk Highway 101 (Lyman Boulevard to Pioneer Trail) EA - DNR Comments
Mr. Oehme,
The DNR has reviewed the Environmental Assessment/Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the Trunk Highway 101
project located In the City of Chanhassen. The project as proposed will require fill being placed in DNR Public Water
Wetland 10.215W and is subject to DNR Public Waters Work permitting authority. The DNR Area Hydrologist should be A
contacted for DNR authorization. The Area Hydrologist may waive the impacts to the WCA LGU (the City of Chanhassen)
if the impacted area of 10.215W is less than 1 acre. Please contact Jack Gleason, DNR Area Hydrologist, at 651-259-5754
'A or by e-mail at ichn.1deason@state. mn.us for more information.
Thankyou,
Melissa
IB Melissa Oaperalski
Region 3 Environmental Assessment Ecologist
Department of Natural Resources
651.259.5738
el . O Piski@5tammmus
5,
"'�JA Metropolitan Council
A
August 15, 2011
CITY°
Paul Ochme, P.B., Project Manager
City ofehanhassen
7700 Market Blvd.
PO Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317t
RE: Environmental Asslssment/Environmental Assessment Workshoet. TH 101 between (CSAH 18)1.yman
Blvd and CSAH 14 (Pioneer Trail)
Metropolitan Council District 4, Gary Van Eyll
Review File No. 20881-1
Dear Mr. Oehme:
Metropolitan Council staff has reviewed the environmental assassmetu (rA) for this project to determine its
adequacy and accuracy in addressing regional concerns, potential impacts that warrant further investigation, and
the need for an environmental impact statement (EIS).
This section of TH 101 will be reconstructed to a four -lane divided section with turn lanes added at Pioneer Trail,
Kiowa Trait and 966 Street. A median, m ixed use trail and curb and gutter will be added. The road grade will be
changed to flatten the horizontal and vertical curvesalthough the existing alignment will generally be followed.
The.Council staff rinds that an EIS is not necessary for regional purposes. However, Cuuncil staff ollcrs the I 1A
following technical comments which should be addressed:
Regional Parks (Tori Dupre 651-602-1621)
Although the EA document discusses a new recreation (mixed use) trail, neither it nor the EAW mentions the
Highway 101 Regional Trail planned for this highway corridor.
The EA section (page 9 of 19) describes a trait to be constructed, as part of the preferred alternative, along the
west side of the roadway from Bandimere Park to Pioneer Trail (Hwy. 14). The trail will be a 10-foot wide
multi -use trail, with.a five-foot boulevard bchveen the trail and die roadway, and will connect to Bandimere Park
through a trail underpass. This alternative also includes a second trail segment along the east side of TH 101
beginning at Pioneer Trail and connecting to the existing trail in Bandimere Park. Therefore, the project will
provide traits on both sides of the highway to provide access to the park.
The EAW section (pages 24, of 28) provides supporting information from the City ofChanhassen's 2030
comprehensive plan. The City needs to work with Carver County Parks' staff to acknowledge the Carver County
2030 Comprehensive Plan parks element, and the policies for future trail opportunities that include the Highway
101 Regional Trail. The County plan states that "the Metropolitan Council Regional Parks Policy Plan
identifies a proposed Highway 101-Regional Trail, -which will connect the Minnesota River Bluffs LRT Regional
Trail to the Lake Minnetonka'Regional Trail.
Appendix A, Water Supply issues (Lanya Ross 651-602-18(13)
The EAW in Appendix A notes that the project will involve the installation of temporary de -watering wed k in a
1,900 foot long stretch along wetlands 3 and 4. Dewatering is expected to be from shallow water -bearing soils.
www.nwtmxmnea.org
390 Robert Street North - St. Pauli. MN 55101-1805 • (01) 602.1000 - Fax 40511002-1550 • M (651) 291.0904
,N, rnuM 4d^o„"Mein nhnrT
the water will be treated using standard erosion control measures and discharged to one or more nmnnred surface
waters. A DNR water appropriation permit will be sought if needed.
The Twin Cities Master Water Supply Plan identified the following issues that need to be addressed, should
water appropriations increase within the boundaries of the City:
• Potential for well interference
• Potential for impacts ofgroundwater pumping on surface water features
• Potential for impacts to state protected Seminary Fen and Assumption Creek, and
• Issues identified in MDH Source Water Assessments.
The need to mitigate these issues should be part of water appropriation permit discussions with DNR.
Item It -Fish, Wildlife, and Ecologically Sensitive Resources (dim Larsen, 651-6024159)
Wetland areas are present on each side of the existing roadway corridor. The prevalence of these water features
along the roadway corridor lobe revised from a rural to an urban cross-section raises the concern for wildlife
impacts following completion of the project. Council staffrecommends revision of project specifications to
require utilization of sloping, surmountable curbs for raised medians and outer pavement edge. T ho use of
standard, rtear-vertical B624 curbing for ilia new roadway as proposed can be expected to result in nearly full
mortality of the area's turtle population by entrapping them within the roadway as they pass between and to
nearby wetlands and water bodies. The simple change to a more gently sloping curb will reduce the mortality
risk without impacts to storm water flow, driver and pedestrian safety, or maintenance activities: We suggest use
of Minnesota Department of Transportation Curb and Gutter Design No. S524, or a similar design profile,
Item 16- Erosion and Sedimentation (Jim Larsen, 651-602-1159)
Document text (EAW page 8 of28) states that #bete are "no steep slopes or highly erodible soils present within
the project site." This statement directly conflicts with the text (EA page 5 o£19), under Section I/1 Project
Purpose and Need that states that "[11he corridor has several safety problems related to steep grades, sharp
curves, and severe changes in vertical profile." Additionally, the soil conditions presented under Item 19 _.
Geologic Hazards and Soil Conditions (EAW page I 1 of 28) indicate that there are soils within the project area
with characterized slopes of 12 to 18 %, 18 to 25 %, and 25 to 40 % slopes; and five ofthe twelve different soil
types identified by the Soil Survey for the area have a 'moderate' risk for soil erosion. The concern for erosion is
sufficient to plan for the construction of retaining walls in conjunction with the proposed project. Council staff
suggests that the EAW text be revised to be consistent with the erosion concern described elsewhere in the
document.
B
lfyon have questions about these comments, please contact Ann Braden, Principal Reviewer, at 651-6ti2-1705.
P2yl1SfiSu!nK-W1e-"
Manager. Local Planning Assistance
CC.' Cheryl Olson, Reviews Coordinator
Tod Sherman, Development Reviews Coordinator.
Tom Caswell, Sector Representative
i:,`.11aLnEty tip.i"c'..naun::;,,,hvJ.x.::`E::e;..;1•.:R%•a,;:n:?tit t}.¢:<tse,.s: t'e iti
6.
Riley
a",d ae eeanaaers
Purgatory
Bluff Creek
Watershed District
a rce14,Ws„�
w vatU-"d,ws
August24, 2011
Paul Oehrne, P.E.
Project Manager
City of Chanhassen
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Subject: Trunk Highway (TH)101 Reconstruction between CSAHs 18 and 14
Review of Environmental Assessment and Section 4(F) Evaluation
Dear Mr. oehme:
The District has reviewed the Environmental Assessment and Section 4(F) Evaluation for SP
194-010-011 Minnesota Project No. STPX 1011(146) and offers to the City the following
continents:
1. Appendix B EAW, Item 12 - page 6, states a wetland boundary delineation will take
place in the Spring of 2011. j
a. Please provide a copy of the wetland boundary delineation to the District to A
review.
2. Appendix B EAW, Item 14- page 7, states the designated shoreland zone for Riley
Lake extends west to the Kiowa/THI01 intersection and that the project as currently
planned does not trigger any additional requirements do to this portion of the
project being within the shoreland zone.
a. Please provide a map of the shoreland zone for Lake Riley.
b. Please indicate which regulatory agency determined that there are no B
additional requirements due to a portion of the project being within the
shoreland zone. Please provide related documentation of this determination.
3. Appendix B EAW, Item 17 - page 8, states project impervious surface will increase
6.9 acres, from existing 7,8 acres impervious to 14.7 acres impervious.
a. Has consideration been given to Low Impact Development (LID) practices to
decrease the amount of additional impervious project area? There appear to C
be several project areas that may lend themselves to the use of pervious
pavement. For example, pervious pavement could be used for the new
eNa2nseCr-CH'drA Nlkt,+23q a�er,xnaa�hf.ff=,v:. as��4n,,^�C,n, F.ann>inY. rtnw3+:�.. fAN ,F77:> te.t4l rafi�NSr.�a
es.ardFna4ar<KrakbbaoP And HAlk, ?csFi Sea6.h r'i'.;3, i;i<tnt iNih 7=ian. hirz;frz•,a;ur',r.. 4kfd l:,e..,l s.S:ix',�*,;_;gx„r,;?
Paul Oehme, P.E.
City of Chanhassen
August 24, 2011
Page 2 of 3
recreational trails throughout the project area. The new parking lot in the
Park could also be a reasonable use of pervious pavement.
4. Appendix B F.AW, Item 17- page 8, states drainage system improvements will
consist of replacing or extending existing culverts, installation of new storm sewer
systems and installation of three wet sedimentation ponds and possibly a filtration
basin to treat runoff prior to discharge.
a. Figure 4 shows location of wet sedimentation ponds, but does not show
location of filtration basin. Please provide additional information on
infiltration basin basis of design, design, tributary area size, and location.
b. Have project plans progressed such that a stormwater drainage plan is
available to review? If so please provide the stormwater drainage plan for
review.
c. As stated, 0.8 acres of the project area will not be routed to storm water
ponds, but will be routed to vegetated ditches. Please provide information
and data that shows the level of treatment expected in these ditches. Please
also provide the calculations/morsel results that show how hydraulics will
be addressed by these ditches.
S. Please provide plans and related information that shows/describes how the
wetlands, ponds, lake, and other water bodies in the area will be protected during
construction.
Regarding one of the stated goals of the study - to provide transportation solutions that
minimize environmental impacts, consideration should be given to other concepts such as
infiltration of storm water at the source using LID/infiltration mean such as rain gardens
permeable pavement, or infiltration swales. These LID practices can slow down and
infiltrate storm water at the source, thus possibly helping to achieve the intended objectives
by decreasing stormwater runoff. Have such approaches been considered? The District
encourages the use of LID practices. As such, the District has a Municipal Roadway Grant
program for projects such as this. This Program makes available up to $50,000 in funding or
in kind services for the Inclusion of LID design components.
IR
Paul Oehrfte, P.is.
City of Clit a iassert
August 24, 2011
Page 3 of 3
Should you have any questions or follow up comments regarding this matter, please feel
free to contact me at 651.365.g542 or Mark.EnochsOCH2M.cont.
Sincerely,
CH2M HULL, INC.
District Engineer
1�r
Mark 0. Fmochs, P.E.
Vice President/Program Manager
C. Board of Managers
Coordinator
Paul Oehme, Chanhassen City Engineer
City of Chanhassen
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Box 147
Chanhassen, MN $5317
po,•�+*�f�}ci chanlaas�annn u5
August 22, 2011
Dear Mr. Oehme and Chanhassen City Council Members,
This letter is in regards to the project TM 101 CSAH 18 (Lyman Blvd) to CSAH 14 (Pioneer Trail)
Project Coals
1) Improve safety for traffic and people along die TH and corridor while minimizing environmental impacts
6 Redticc crashes to the coval passible
g Add nrrn lanes to piavide safe ntrning may enrems at imersecdans
® Improve eight distance by rednrittg sharp canes and Awgp grades near inters. •ervons
2) Improve capacity and connectivity for people and goats along the Tf) 101 corridor
M Accommodate nghwat and !oral transportation iw& ofan&eipated polndattan and wrgeelaymentgrouth hi the
TN 101 Corridor by increasing Inf}ic wpuckr
3) Provide transportation solutions that minimize environmental impacts
a Atwidtminiarke%mifigare impacu on caviranrmntal. Social, amieultr 1 M-011rces
a Afintntize need for new right of nape takingsfrom husiness and reridemiat praperdes
The project proposal appears to have addressed some of the safety and connectivity goals; however the
project as currently proposed does not minimize the environmental impact, and must be reconsidered.
The reconstruction of approximately I mile of the existing two lane roadway to a four plus lane
divided highway as described in the 115 page environmental impact assessment will significantly
change the landscape of the roadway and adjacent area, retriving 1000 plus trees, adding holding
ponds and increasing traffic and noise levels. The single plan presented by the City ofC,hanhassen
offers only two options - to proceed or leave as is. Alternative plans need to be developed and
presented that will address all of the project goats, including minimizing environmental impacts to the
landscape.
As a concerned citizen, I urge you to reconsider the impact of the proposed design, and work with the
community to develop a better solution, that will improve the safety of the roadway white preserving
the natural beauty and character of the surroundings for current and future generations.
Michael, Brenda, Garrett and Christian Wise
9571 Foxford Road, Chanhassen, MN 55317
9.
August 22, 2011
Dear Mr. (khme and Chanhassen City Council Members,
This leter is in regards to the projectTH 101 CSAH IS (Lyman Blvd) to CSAH 14
(Pioneer Trail)
Project Costs
I) improve safety for traffic and people alongthe'n-1 101 corridor while minimizing environmental
impacts
® Reduce crarhes to the crient possible
Add rare lanes toprovide s* turning movements at intersections
Improve sight detmtee by reducing sharp carves andsteep grades — tmersections
2) Improve capacity and connectivity for people and goods along the TH 101 corridor
Q Accommodate regional and local transportation needs ofamicipatedpopulation mul
employment growth in the T11 10 1 corridor by tmrreasing traffic capacity
3) Provide transportation solutions gist minimize environmental impacts
a Avoid/minimizelmotgate impacts on environmental, social, and cultural resources
El Miaimize need fttr new right of way takingsfrom business and residential properties
The project proposal appears to have addressed some ofthe safety and connectivity goals;
however the project as currently proposed does not minimize the environmental impact, and
must be reconsidered. The reconstruction of approximately 1 mile ofthe existing two lane
roadway to a four plus lane divided highway as described in the I 15 page environmental
impact assessment %Wl significantly change the landscape of the roadway and adjacent area,
removing 1000 plus trees, adding holding ponds and increasing traffic and noise levels.
The single plan presented by the City of Chanhassen offers only two options - to proceed
or leave as is. Alternative plaits need to be developed and presented that will address all of
the project goals, including minimizing environmental impacts to the landscape.
As a concerted citima, I urge you to rcoonsider the impact of the proposed design, and
work with the community to develop a better solution, that will improve the safety of the
roadway while preserving the natural beauty and character ofthe surroundings for current
and future generations.
Signature:
xo.
August 22, 2011
Dear Mr. Ochme and Chanhassen City Council Members
This letter is in regards to the projcctTH 101 CSAH 18 (Lyman Blvd) to C&M 14
(Pioneer Trail)
Project Goals
1) improve safety for traffic unit people atougthe TH 101 corridor white minimizing environmental
impacts
lM Reduce a rwhes to trio ertem possble
®Add turn lanes toprovide safe turning movements at intersections
M improve sight distance by reducing sharp curves and sreepgrade~s near intersections
2) improve capacity and connectivity for people and goods along the TH 101 corridor
(M Accommodate regional and local transportation needs ofamicipated population and
employment growth in the Tll 101 corridor by lucreasing traffic capacity
3) Provide transportation solutions that minimize environmental impacts
® Avoidlminimizefmitigate impacts an environmental, social, and cultural resources
(�ja, Minimize need far new right of waytakimgsfrom business a"d residrmlal propertles
The project proposal appears to have addressed some of the safety and connectivity goals;
however the project as currently proposed does not minimize the environmental impact, and
must be reconsidered. The reconstruction of approximately 1 mile ofthe existing two lane
roadway to a four plus lane divided highway as described in the 115 page environmental
impact assessment will significantly change the landscape ofthe roadway and adjacent area,
removing 1000 plus trees, adding holding ponds and increasing traffic and noise levels,
The single plan presented by the City of Chanhassen offers only two options - to proceed
or leave as is. Alternative plans need to be developed and presented that will address all of
the protect goals, including minimizing environmental impacts to the landscape.
As a concerned citizen, I urge you to reconsider the impact of the proposed design, and
work with the community to develop a better solution, that will improve the safety ofthe
roadway white preserving the natural beauty and character ofthe surroundings for current
and future generations.
Signature:
11.
Paul C)ehme. Chanhassen City f nginecr
City ofC'hanhasscn
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
txtchtm�r�si t�,jl;�t,rtp�
August 21, 2011
Dear Mr, C)chute and Chanhassen City Council Mcmbers,
This letter is in regards to the prctiect'I`H 101 CSAH 18 (Lyman Blvd) to CSAH 14 (PioncerTrail)
rrojeo Goals
I ) Improve safety rot tndOc and people along the Ttt 10 t corridor while tit inimirin,p envimnntcnnnt iatpncts
Ketka•e cr(Wwv M dm ream 1aasN1tic
ddd tunr borer to proride ,calf' turning movements to intersections
improve sighs dim"n,v by reducing sharp earres om I.vtcepgradex near iatersecrioas
'_) Improve capacity and connectiv ity for "to and goods along Ihe, 'n 1 I01 corridor
.Icrotnm me t-egional and local trwt portadna nerds of tauiopoted paptdation ,end emplgvmem grewtb in the
IN tell corrldnr hy' increasing iraj. lc vaptcio,
3) Provide transportation solutions that minimize environmental impacts
.41wieLhnitrirnr:ranitigarr impacts an Knrvlratmtenrul, swiol, and c•ulatral resources
1ltninize needfor. new right of wety takingv from hnsinecs and residential properties
The project proposal appears to have addressed some ofihc safety and connectivity concerns: however
the environmental impact ofthe project should be reconsidered, The reconstruction ofapproximately
I mile of the existing two lane roadway to a four plus lane divided highway as described in the 115
page environmental impact assessment will significantly change the landscape ofthe roadway and
adjacent area, removing 1061) plus trees, adding holding ponds and increasing traffic and noise levels,
The single plan presented otters only 2 options, to proceed or leave as is. Alternative plans need to be
developed and presented that will address all ofthe prgicct goats, including minimizing environmental
impacts to the landscape.
As concerned citizens, we urge you to reconsider rite impact ofthe proposed design, and work with the
community to develop a better solution, that will improve the safety of the roadway while preserving
the natural beauty and character ofthe surroundings for current and future generations.
Signature: _�r!+�a?�
Address: &36 i,t #--94a" All
Paul Oehnte, Chanhassen City 6ttgincer
City of Chanhassen
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
August 22, 2011
Dear Mr. Ochme and Chanhassen City Council Members,
This letter is in regards to the prniect TH 101 CSAH 18 (Lyman Blvd) to CSAH 14 (Pioneer Trait)
Project Goals
1) improve safety ror traffic and people along the lI1 101 corridor while minimizing environmental impacts
0 Reduce creches to the cnetenl possible
0 Add turn Inns to protidesale turning annvurems at Intersections
M Improve sight distance by reducing sharp crtrvcs and steep grades never intersection
2) Improve capacity and connectivity for people and goods along the 711 101 corridor
MA ecornmodate regiemrd and local transparanirnt necdv of anticipated population and emplovmem growth in the
TN 101 corridor by increasing tra,Qic capaeio•
3) Provide transportation solutions that minimize environmental impacts
0 Arnid/nrinimi-elmitigale impacts an environmental. social, and cultural resources
0 Alhuinike needfor neteright of wrq+tuklogs•1ranr bHviness mid residential properties
The project proposal appears to have addressed some of the safety and connectivity concerns, however
the environmental impact ofthe project should be reconsidered. The reconstruction of approximately
I mule of the existing two lane roadway to a four plus lane divided highway as described in the 115
page environmental impact assessment will significantly change the landscape of the roadway and
adjacent area, removing 1000 plus, trees, adding holding ponds and increasing traffic and noise levels.
The single plan presented offers only 2 options, to proceed or leave as is. Alternative plans need to be
developed and presented that will address all of the project goals, including minimizing environmental
impacts to the landscape.
As concerned citizens. we urge you to reconsider the impact of the proposed design, and work with the
community to develop a better solution, that will improve the safety of the roadway while preserving
the natural beauty and character of the surroundings for current and future generations.
01 Address' 6a 'rtL
12.
13.
Paut Oehme, Chanhassen City f:ngineer
City of Chanhassen
7700 Mnrkrt Reurlevard
PO Box 147
Chanhassen. MN 55317
pnglittictri-cs,c:hacah z 5ct .tnn_us
August22,2011
Dear Mr. Oehme and Chanhassen City Council Members.
This letter is in regards to the projcct TH 101 CSAH 18 (Lyman Blvd) to CSAH 14 (Pioneer Trail)
Protect coah
1) Imprave safety for traffic and people along the Tit 101 corridor while minimizing environmental impacts
Reduce crashes to the extent passible
Add turn lanes to provide safe turning movements at intersections
improve sight distance by reducing sharp curvos -it steep grades near intersections
2) Improve capacity arel connectivity for people and goods along the TH lot corridor
Aecommodele regional and local transportation needs ofanticipared population and employment growth in the
T11161 corridor by increathtg traffic capacity
3) Provide transportation solutions that minimize environmental impacts
Avoid'adminadmftigate impacts an emiramnental, social, and cultural resourecs
Mlnlmizerreed jar new right of way takailis from business and residential prapc As
The project proposal appears to have addressed some of the safety and connectivity goals; however the
project as currently proposed does not minimize the environmental impact, and mast be reconsidered.
Tire reconstruction of approximately 1 mile of the existing two lane roadway to a four plus lane
divided highway as described in the 115 page environmental impact assessment will significantly
change the landscape of the roadway and adjacent area, removing 1000 plus trees, adding holding
ponds and increasing traffic and noise levels Thesingle plan presented by the City of Chanhassen
offers only two options -to proceed or leave as is. Altrmative plans need to be developed and
presented that will address all ofthe project goals, including minimizing WVhUnmental impacts to the
landscape.
As a concerned citizen, I urge you to reconsider the impact of the proposed design, and work with the
community to develop a better solution, that will improve the safety of the roadway while preserving
the natural beauty and charatter of the surroundings for current and future generations.
Signature:
Address: f `71 / ee'a✓� �(1��I Lg�
14.
Paul Oehme, Chanhassen City Engineer
City of Chanhassen
7700 Market Boulevard
PO sox 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
mehme_(fti.chanhassen.rnn.us
August 24, 2011
Dear Mr. Oehme and Chanhassen City Council Members,
This letter is in regards to the project TH 101 CSAH 18 (Lyman Blvd) to
CSAH 14 (Pioneer Trait).
Project Goats
1) Improve safety for traffic and people along the TH 101 corridor while minimizing environmental impacts
Reduce crashes to the extent possible
Add turn lanes to provide safe turning movements at intersections
improve sight distance by reducing sharp curves and steep grades near Wersections
2) improve capacity and connectivity for people and goods along the TH 101 corridor
Accommodate regional and local transportation needs of anticipatad population and employment
growth in the 7H 101 corridor by increasing traffic capaorty
3) Provide transportation solutions that minimize environmental impacts
Avoidlminimfze/mitigate impacts on environmental, social, and cultural resources
" Minimize need for now right ofway takings from business and residential properties
The project proposal appears to have addressed some of the safety and connectivity goals; however
the project as currently proposed does not minimize the environmental impact, and must be
reconsidered.
The reconstruction of approximately 1 mite of the existing two lane roadway to a four plus lane divided
highway as described in the 115 page environmental impact assessment will significantly change the
landscape of the roadway and adjacent area, removing 1000 plus trees, adding holding ponds and
increasing traffic and noise levels. The single plan presented by the City of Chanhassen offers only
two options - to proceed or leave as is. Alternative plans need to be developed and presented that
will address all of the project goals, including minimizing environmental impacts to the landscape.
As concerned citizens, and neighboring property owners, we urge you to reconsider the impact of the
proposed design, and work with the community to develop a better solution, that will improve the
safety of the roadway while preserving the natural beauty and character of the surroundings for
current and future generations.
Thank you,
Duane & Susan Hoff
9511 Foxford Road
Chanhassen, MN 65317
Paul pdtM C7utrthatssen City Engineer
City ofCIlatlhasson
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Box 147
Clumhassca, MN $5317
August 22, 2011
Dear Mr. Ochme and Chanhassen City Council Members,
This letter is in regards to the project TH 101 CSAH 18 (Lyman Blvd) to CSAH 14 (Pioneer Trail)
Project Cash
i) improve safety for iodic and people along the TH 101 corridor while minimizing environmentai impacts
13 Redrxe crashes to the extent possible
M Add tarn tones to provide safe nerning movrrrtenu at intersections
0 Improve sight distance by rethicing Avrp parrs and steep grades mar b+terxections
2) improve capacity and cotneetivity for people and goods along the TH 101 corridor
Q Aceammodive regional aril local transportation needs ofonticipared population and cmPloyment growth in the
711101 corridor by increasing traffic capacity
3) Provide transportation solutions that minimize environmental impacts
0 AsvmiJ/miainrL•e/mhigrne impacts mr enrironn+cvnal, mrrial amiculittral resumes
13 Minimize reed for new right of Kay takings from busumes and residenuol pmparliev
The project proposal appears to have addressed some of the safety and connectivity goals; however the
project as currently proposed does not minimize the environmental impact, and must be reconsidered.
The reconstruction ofapproximately 1 mile ofthe existing two lane roadway to a four plus lane
divided highway as described in the 115 page environmental impact assessment will signitiicantly
change the landscape ofthe roadway and adjacent area, removing 1000 plus trees, adding holding
ponds and increasing traffic and noise levels. The single plan presented by the City of Chanhassen
offers only two options - to proceed or leave as is. Alternative plats need to be developed and
presented that will address all ofthe project goals, including minimizing environmental impacts to the
landscape.
As a concerned citizen. I urge you to reconsider the impact ofthe proposed design, and work with the
community, to develop a better solution, that will improve the safety of the roadway while preserving
the natural beauty and character ofthe surroundings for current and future generations.
Signature: Karen Derr
Address: M l Foxford Rd.
Chanhassen Mn 55317
15. 16.
Payne, Ashley
lemm: uehme. Paul 1poehme@ci chatdtaseetr.rrut usj
Sedgy: Wednesday, August 24. 20117.61 PM
To: Larson, Chadd Horn, Jot
Subject: FW: ProjectTH 101
Sent from my Motorola phone.
-----Original Message Attached ----
From: Colleen Radtke <colleen radtke0thetmail.00m>
Sent: Wed Aug 24 13:03,13 CDT 2D11
To. "Oehme, Paul" <ooehmeAci.chanhassMve .mn.us>
Subject: Project TH 101
Paul Oehme, Chanhassen City Engineer
Cityorchanhmxesi
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Has r47
Chanhassen, MN $5317
HYPFR[JNK "rrsilo�aooha„rgici viianit�srn ran r::" L "_imtaak" p�yyhril�¢�ioi()aQhttsscin.ma.us
August 22, 2011
Dear Mr. Och me and Chanhassen City Council Members.
This letter it in regards to the pi+n)cd TH 101 CSAH 13 (Lyman Blvd) to CSAH 14 jPiaeeer T"M
rr*d c.w
1) Imprmv rafay fa -.IT. and pmpk atmg the TIr Ial ,pelf.' -fill, sniaiaariog rnvim WWA 1-4wls
.. ,aemhrca sradaa m ter,+lint passlhk
,- Adr7eum lmu.r re prwkkxxterdrmx�mosa»rexaom7nre»erRuxx
. Gupru}releMrJArmrret9<nArchg slaarrFcxnrxaxlsrer�r+ark:row txmrusriwn
2)Imtxav,ratacignmlai,ity iarpcorkand p-4taag 9. 711rot unahW
'; An:nxwurdun r.�,toswt xxdlr+adnxu�;r+nr+lxnnm# nj�eMpnhddTZy+x7urbx "eaie+gd }»rcnrgxr»ft fin she !n tGP rvvr&krhyixrrredxk; rnQ)I.• «r/nrtry
}) Pm.uk lsaaywnaliun aniWwro ib14 sninitldzc,avilartataif irrr>5rls
.1.oktrwlxixx:rfmn+mX+r, rxpuazx nu mutrrmnse ml, u+cfd.mWrnl&uW
:'Mfxiroure uredfvrrxm•NghrM`»x}•zadi�f mbnrirmu ami.atidrWin±/+rp+rners
The Project pmposal appears to have addressed same of the sakty and connectivity goals; however the project ascurrently proposed does no
minimize the cnvimnmenml impact, and must be twensidered. The reconstruction of appmwimarely I mile of the existing two lane roadway to a
four phis lane divided highway as described in the 115 page eiwitaroa-nW impact assessment will significantly change the landscape of the modway
and adjacent area, rentaaving 1000 plus trio. adding holding ponds and increasingtmitic and noise levels. Tim single plan presented by the City of
Clanhassen o1't.rs early twxmaptirans -to procured a Icavr as is Altornmimpbm need to be dewtopef and presented that will address all ofthe
procet gosh, inetu ling minimizing covireamental impacts to die landscape,
As a concerned cilizon.I arse you to reconsider the impact of the pmpowd design, and work with dnr mmmmity to dov+clop a better solution, that
will improve thesak4y ofthe roadway while preserving the natural beauty and chisacter of the surroumlings feu otnreemt and fare gcinxadois.
SignaWrc: iwrand Colima Radike
Address: 9$31 pox&xd Road
ClianhassetMN
17.
Paul Oehme, Chanhassen City Engineer
City of Chanhassen
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Boat 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
htn tci�ci.chanhassen.nm.us
August 22. 2011
Dear Mr. Ochmc and Chanhassen City Council Members,
This letter is in regards to the project TH 101 CSAH 18 (Lyman Blvd) to CSAH 14 (Pioneer Trail)
Projett Goals
1) improve safely fix traffic and people along the TH 101 corridor white minimizing cnvironmental impacts
G Reduce crashes to the extent im dwe
M Add turn lanes to provide so tarring mac meals at intersections
M haprora .sight distance by reducing sharp curves and steep j radas near orter.cecitrns
2) luiprm c capacity and connectivity for people and goods along the TH lot corridor
M .leconmuxkov regional and local transportation need* pfaurk"red poixdation taut ennplrpmeat growth In the
771101 corridor by increrating tra a capuc fy
3) ProOde trarmportalion solutions that minimize environmental impacts
M Aewidlodi itti elmiligrne impacts on onvirano nial, social and cultural resources
EB Uninnx teed for new right of nor ldcingsfrom basawss and resideruial pmpettiev
The project proposal appears to have addressed some of the safety and connectivity goals; however the
project as currently proposed does not minimize the environmental impact, and must be reconsidered.
The reconstruction ofapproximately I mile ofthc existing two lane roadway to a four plus lane
divided highway as described in the I 15 page environmental impact assessment will significantly
change the landscape ofthe roadway and adjacent area, removing 1000 plus trees, adding holding
ponds and increasing traffic and noise levels. The single plan presented by the City of Chanhassen
offers only two options - to proceed or leave as is. Alternative plans need to be developed and
presented that will address all ofthe project goals, including minimizing environmental 'impacts to the
landscape.
As a concerned citizen I urge you to reconsider the impact of the proposed design, and work with the
community to develop a better solution, that will improve the safety of the roadway while preserving
the natural beauty and character of the surroundings for current and future generations.
Signature: _ _James and Teresa Giusti
Address: 540 Pincview
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Paul Clchute, Chanhassen City Engineer
City of Chanhassen
7700 Market Boukvard
PC) Box 147
Chanhassen, NIN 55317
August 22, 2011
Dear Mr. Oehme and Chanhassen City Council Members,
This letter is in regards to the project TH 10.1 CSAH 18 (Lyman Blvd) to CSA1114 (Pioneer Trail)
Project Goals
1)Improve safetyfor traffic andpeoplealongthre'1"Hfnicorridorwhileminimizingenvironmentalimpacts
W Reduce an ibex to the extent 14),%mble
0Add nrrn lanes to provide atfe turning rito ir, menix of haerwelintet
13hnprove sight distance by rcdnoirrg Aurrp citrves and steep grades near intersections
2) improve capacity and connectivity fur people and goods along the TH 101 corridor
0 Acconnnodote regional and local traugwrarion rmeds of annticiimied pnindanon and *mph yxrreM bmmvih in the
7N 101 c'or4d rr by inrcrxasing traffic -pacuy
3) Provide transportation solutions that minimize environmental impacts
M AvnkUnunimiw1mingare impacts on environunwntot, social, and cultural resourctzs
M Unitniae reed fur nets right of rvay lakhtgs£rain business druireshicutial properties
The proiect proposal appears to have addressed some of the safety and connectivity goals; however the
project as currently proposed does not minimize the environmental impact, and must be reconsidered.
The reconstruction of approximately 1 toile ofthe existing two lane roadway to a four plus lane
divided highway as described in the 115 page environmental impact assessment will significantly
change the landscape of the roadway and adjacent area, removing 1000 plus trees, adding holding
ponds and increasing traffic and noise levels. The single plan presented by the City of Chanhassen
offers only two options - to proceed or leave as is. Alternative plans need to be developed and
presented that will address all ofthe project goals, including minimizing environmental impacts to the
landscape.
As a concerned citizen, I urge you to reconsider the impact of the proposed design, and work with the
community to develop a better solution, that will improve the safety ofthe roadway while preserving
the natural beauty and character ofthe surroundings for current and future generations.
Signature:
�r ttl
Address:
is.
19.
Payne, Ashley
From: Oehme, Paul (poehmeQd.chanhsssen.mn.usI
Sant: Wednesday, August 24, 2011 7:45 PM
To: Horn, Jon; Larson, Chadd
Subject: FW: TH 101, CSAH 18 to CSAH 14
Sent from my Motorola phone.
----Original Message Attached ---
From: Richard Chadwick <dchc adlawOomall.com>
Sent. Wed Aug 2415:59:50 CDT 2011
To: "Oehme, haul" < >
Subject TH 101, CSAH 18 to CSAH 14
Paul Ochme, Chanhassen City Engineer
City of Chanhassen
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
August 22, 2011
Dear Mr. Ochme and Chanhassen City Council Members,
This letter is in regards to the project TH 101 CSAH 18 (Lyman Blvd) to CSAH 14 (Pioneer Trail)
The project proposal appears to have addressed some of the safety and connectivity goals; however the project
as currently proposed does not minimize the environmental impact, and must be reconsidered. The
reconstruction of approximately 1 mile of the existing two lane roadway to a four plus lane divided highway as
described in the 115 page environmental impact assessment will significantly change the landscape of the
roadway and adjacent area, removing 1000 plus trees, adding holding ponds and increasing trat]ic and noise
levels. The single plan presented by the City of Chanhassen offers only two options - to proceed or leave as is,
Alternative plans need to be developed and presented that will address all of the project goals, including
minimizing environmental impacts to the landscape.
As a concerned citizen, I urge you to reconsider the impact of the proposed design, and work with the
community to develop a better solution, that will improve the safety of the roadway while preserving the natural
beauty and character of the surroundings for current and future generations.
Signature: Richard J. Chadwick
Address: 9530 Foxford Rd.
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Dick Chadwick
952 445 2425
20.
Payne, Ashley
From: Oehm% Paul Ipoehma@d.rhanhassen,mn,usj
Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2011 7:41 PM
To: Hon, Jon; Larson, Chadd
Subject: FW: This letter is In regards to the project TH 101 CSAH 18 (Lyman Blvd) to CSAH 14
(Pioneer Trail)
Sent from my Motorola phone.
---•-•Ongkial MessageAttached----
from: Pam O'Neill <mym418@omail.com>
Sent: Wed Aug 24 18:07:36 CDT 2011
To: "Oehme, Paul" < >
Subject: This letter Is in regards to the project TH 101 CSAH 18 (Lyman Blvd) to CSAH 14 (Pioneer Trait)
Dear Mr. Ochme and Chanhassen City Council Members
This letter is in regards to the project TH 101 CSAH 18 (Lyman Blvd) to CSAH 14 (Pioneer Trail)
Frain coats
1) Improve safety for traffic and people along the TH lot corridor while minimizing.enviromatinal impacts
6 Reduce crashes to the extear possible
m Add turn hares to provide safe turning movements at iriterroetians
t8Improve sight distance by reducing sharp canoes arul steepgnuies nearintencerimax
2) lmprow capacity and connectivity for people and goads along the TH 101 corridor
Acconmradata regirraat aced local trarrsportatipn needs afmukiputed papnlatian urul empla�nrent grvi+Yh in the 7H It l
corridor bj, increasing true ertlxretoi
3) Provide transportation solutions that minimize environmental impacts
B AvoidrmintudzeJmitlgate lnyracts on emironrmmral. social, and ealtaral resources
M blinhirkee need for new right af aa3• takingsfrrmn business mid residential properties
The project proposal appears to have addressed some of the safety and connectivity goals. however the project
as currently proposed does not ininimize the environmental impact, and must be reconsidered. The
reconstruction of approximately 1 mile of the existing two lane roadway to a four plus lane divided highway as
described in the 115 page environmental impact assessment will significantly change the landscape of the
roadway and adjacent area. removing 1000 plus trees, adding holding ponds and increasing traffic and noise
levels. The single plan presented by the City of Chanhassen offers ers only two options - to proceed or leave as is.
Alternative plans need to be developed and presented that will address all ofthe project goals, including
minimizing environmental impacts to the landscape,
Asa concerned citizen. I urge you to reconsider the impact of tie proposed design, and work with the
community to develop a better solution, that will improve the safety ofthe roadway while preserving the natural
beauty and character of the surroundings for current and future generations.
We have been residents on 101 and Foxford Rd for 23 years and would be greatly devastated by the removal of
1000 plus trees. The reason we have been paying exorbitant taxes for the duration has been the tranquility and
wildlife that abounds on our property. In taking down 1000 plus trees. this will no longer exist. t have
personally been in a crash on 101 that totaled my car and am in full support of the safety reasons for
straightening the road but there is absolutely no need for a 4lane parkway.
Pam aNcitl
4550 Foxford Rd.
21.
MUM
Froth: Oehme. Paul tPoehmead.chaMtastlen.mn.usj
Sant: Wednesday, August 24, 20117:50 PM
Ta: Hurt, ,Ion; Larson, chadd
subject FW: KW 101 Project
Sent from my Motorola phone.
----Ottglnal Message Attadted•--
Ram: Delaney O'Neill <one103030om I.com>
Sent: Wed Aug 24 13:14:26 CDT 2011
To: "Oehme, Paul" c >
Subject: HW 101 Project
Dear Mr. Ochme and Chanhassen City Council Members,
This letter is in regards to the project TH 101 CSAH 18 (Lyman Blvd) to CSAH 14 (Pioneer
TrAfl)
Pm*t Gash
t) Improvx safety for traffic and people along the TH 101 corridor while minimizing environmental impacts
3 Reduce crashes to the errant passible
g Add tarn funs to provide safe n(rning nwivaears ar irttersceriam
0Improve sight dutmxe by reducing sharp eaves and stmpgr-ks tear -terse, ftwu
2) Improve capacity and connectivity for people and goods along the TH 101 oorTidor
is Accommo&ty iWat tal and local amrsparlatlan ne e4A tfawlaptued poptrlarion and employrnenrgreurh
in the T11 Io/ con*br M• inrousing rrgpw capwht r
3) Provide transportation solutions that minimize environmental impacts
6 Aroidlanniarr..e='ndrigare impacts on ervironotental, social. avid cuhurat resoarees
0 Minimize need far new right of irwy likings five; bresiness and residemiallimperdes
The project proposal appears to have addressed some of the safety and connectivity goals;
however the project as currently proposed does not minimize the environmental impact, and
must be reconsidered. The reconstruction of approximately 1 mile of the existing two lane
roadway to a four plus lane divided highway as described in the 115 page environmental impact
assessment will significantly change the landscape of the roadway and adjacet area, removing
1000 plus trees, adding balding ponds and increasing traffic add noise levels. The single plan
preserved by the City of Chanhassen offers only two options - to proceed or leave as
is. Alternative plans need to be developed and presented that will address all of the project
goals, including minimizing environmental impacts to the landscape.
As a concerned citizen, I urge you to reconsider She impact of the proposed design, and work
with the community to develop a better solution, that will improve the safety of the roadway
while pmserving the natural beauty and character of the surroundings for current and future
generations.
Signature: __Delaney O'Neill
Address: 9550 Foxford Road Chanhassen, MN 55317
For all my life, I've lived in my beautiful neighborhood I have always felt so safe and secure in my
neighborhood. With the removal ofall these trees and disturbing all ofthe peace we've been creating for over 20
years is something that truly saddens me.
Not only to me, hot to many others, we call this place home, and as soon as all ofthese changes are made, it
wont seem like home anymore. Also, many of my neighbors and 1 would love to keep our homes the way it is.
Especially since t haven't thought of there being a problem with the road the whole 18 years I've divert here. The
road is not busy, therefor not needing four lanes, and there has not been many crashes, only a couple throughout
the year, mostly in the winter. And in the winter, there are crashes, drifting and all sons of vehicle damage done
all over.
Highway 101 and Pioneer Trait is what I have known nary whole fife. I would like to keep everything the way it
is and somehow make a more safe. and more reasonable alternative!
Thank you for your time!
With All Gods Blessing <3
Delaney O'Neill
22.
Tom Furlong, Mayor of Chanhassen
Paul Oehme, Chanhassen City Enginecr
City ofChanhassen Council Members
City of Chanhassen
7700 Market Boulevard
Chanhassen, MN 55317
August 22, 2011
Dear Mr. Furlong, Mr. Ochme and Chanhassen City Council Members,
The enclosed petition is in retards to the project TH 101 CSATI IS to CSAH 14.
Although a somewhat limited numbers of signatures have been mccived to date, it is apparent
that the residents or our community have concerns about and are just beginning to be made A
aware of the environmental impact of the atorementioned project, We believe that many more
people will sign the petition once residents are convicted, informed and have a clearer
understanding; of the impact of this project.
Concerned Residents of the T H 101 Condor
� o °
�Go �
E
a
ro t
a g «
6
o o B
Hv
noo
apt
D�� 7i
O n Q
G
�o �o
%y
_- _
p 2 C c
o
u E m
u w N
n
8-
E,
o
c 0 E
C
E «
o •c a 3 X o ro
$ y a OJ.
-
o 2
m
o
�E o
—2 m
va
E N i0
!a 8'z 2. •'y m N a 0-
.a-i a e-b
G
c o 0
e°Aed c A ro $ ro.cj
w a a N E
v
a>.v
'c
o q- ii c
$a�.EE v2
E 'E
m
7+
w mmY c c
oc_
2Em�c
a3EEm
m i
2 0�� i:v
Oo�tEE
v33Co
V V AE
mvv�aa
F t
c
C)
s a
v c v
c
m
,Q
t'
m
Ea
O
O rn
a
o
u
02
o"
f'
i
G
U
Pl
Y
3
v
V
0
^^
C
r
4
d
Y
�
v
t
9
1
Petition to reduce the environmental impact of Hwy 101 road development
Petition summary and
Trunk Hwy 101 Reconstruction from CSAH 18 to CSAH 14 (SP194.010-011 Minn Project SfPX1011(146)
background
See the fullt project information @http:)/www.Ci chanhassen.mn,us/serv/cip/hi8hway!01.html
Project Goats
1) Improve safety for traffic and people along the TH 101 corridor while minimizing environmental impacts
3 Reduce coshes to the extentpossible
dAdd turn lanes ro provide sole taming movements at intersections
ni Improve sight distance by reducingshorpcurves and steep grades near intersecdons
2) Improve capacity and connectivity for people and goods along the TH 101 corridor
(I Accommodate, regional andlocal transportation needs afanticipoted population and employment growth in the TH 101 corridor by inaeasmg rroffc capxiry
3) Provide transportation solutions that minimize environmental impacts
2 Avoid/minimize/miugme, impacts on a -onrenml, social, andculrorol resources
is Minimize need for new right of way takings from business ondresidenoci properpes
The reconstruction of approximately 1 mile of the existing 2lane roadway to a 4lane plus divided highway change as described in the 11.5 page
environmental impact assessment will significantly change the landscape of the roadway and area adjacent adding an additional 6.4 acres or
impermeable surface (asphalt andconcretel adding drainage ponds, increasing traffic and noise levels, clear cutting 1000 plus trees and eliminating
prairies.
The planning is substantially complete and the project is requesting community feedback to move forward. This petition's purpose is to notify project
decision makers that the current proposal Is not satisfactory and that alternative plans need to be developed and presented that address all the project
goals including minimi2ing environmental impacts to the landscape..
Action petitioned for
We, the undersigned, are concerned citizens who urge our leaders to reconsider the impact of the proposed design. We ask
that the designers work more closely with the community to address the significant concerns to develop a better solution that
will improve safety while at the same time preserve the natural beauty and character of the roadway for current and future
generations. At a minimum we ask that a viable additional proposal be developed and presented for a roadway that
maintains the environmental landscape features allowing the community to make the decision on what is best for its
residents.
Printed Name
Signature
Address
Comment
Date
9J - i1�
ti YI I1 )
.3 tS l �r i'� �L
t �tc� zs1=1 n
I 1 I
mot_<i4,yenGyl�tr
23klrw
Printed Name
Snature
Address
Comment
Date
tr5ta pJ L
r _�
fig. t�G S
REse+c? AdcB�*1ir¢.)cs it
-c box-
1 S lz, !(t
0
u
VI
FFaf
MZ
on
y
a;ep
juawwa9
ssaappy
ajn;eu6l!g
awepi pa;uud
°��F,„ Figure 8. Identified Envrionmental Resources
May 2011
23.
Paul oehme, Chanhassen City Engineer Doehme cl.chanhassen.mn.us
City of Chanhassen
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
August 23, 2011
Re. inputtresponse to Environmental Assessment and Section 4(f) Evaluation SP 194-010-011
We are writing this letter in regards to the road improvement project of TH 101 from CSAH 18
to CSAH 14. We are requesting that the designers of the project work more closely with the
community to create a proposal that will address the safety and connectivity issues while taking
into consideration the environmental impact and preserving the natural beauty of the area. As
residents of the city of Chanhassen, and property owners directly affected by the project, we
would like to express our concerns and request alternative or additional plans related to the
environmental impact of the project.
The project has been presented as a measure to 1) improve safety for people along the existing
TH 101 corridor, 2) improve capacity and connectivity for people and goods along the TH 101
corridor and 3) provide transportation solutions that minimize environmental impacts.
our concerns regarding the proposal relate mainly to the environmental impact of the project,
and include the:
• Presentation of only one proposal, with exclusion of viable alternatives
A
• Lack of support to justify the need for such an extreme increase in the size of the
roadway (6.97 acres of impermeable asphalt in a 1 mile road project creating significant
B
run off issues)
( C
• Destruction of native prairie, wildlife shelter and natural sound barriers without
documented plans for replacement
• Lack of support for the need of two bike paths that widen the road and result in the
( D
need for additional right of ways from residential properties
• Three proposed holding ponds requiring new right of ways from residential properties
to address run off issues
E
• Safety of the holding ponds that will be adjacent to the biketraii/walking path and
situated in property owners yards
• Lack of a plan to address the maintenance of the holding ponds to control insects,
odors, and infectious plant growth
• Removal of over 1000 mature trees from a scenic section of roadway
• Lack of consultation/coordination with city arborist regarding city ordinances related to
new project development
F
• Exclusion from the proposal of a plan for replacement of trees and landscaping to create
a visual and/or sound barrier between residences and the impending roadway through
enforcement of the city ordinance (Chapter 18 - Article III - Section 18-61) intended to
address the preservation of trees.
• increased noise level for the residence with removal of the natural sound barrier
• increased air and noise pollution with widening of roadway allowing accessibility for
larger and more vehicles(tress and vegetation are efficient and cost effective means to
Improve air quality and help reduce run-off and topsoil erosion)
• Maintenance and enforcement of the 40 MPH speed limit (the improved elevations and
straightened curves will encourage higher speeds, larger vehicles and greater amounts
of traffic)
• Lack of consideration for decrease in property values due to the issues associated with
development of a major roadway (increased traffic, noise, maintenance expenses, etc.)
• Lack of communication of the project to ail city residence - limited public awareness
The goals of the study as defined in the document have not been fully met. The goals for safety
and connectivity have been addressed in the single proposal that has been offered to the
community. The third goal has not been adequately addressed for reducing the environmental
impact of the project. The level of concern and questions for the current plan and the expense
of the project, -$2.57 million to the local residents, underline the importance of developing a
plan that the community can support in making Chanhassen a place to call home.
We are asking that additional plans be developed collaboratively with the community and that
a broader base of people (outside of those directly affected) be asked for input and consensus
decision -making on the best solution to make the road safer and preserve the natural
landscape beauty.
Douglas and Rebecca Duchon
9630 Poxford Road
Chanhassen, MN 5S317
�H
I�
J
eLIl1
Paut 0)cchmc, Chanhassen City C•,nginecr
City ofChanhassc n.
7700 Market Boulevard
Box 147
Chanhassc it, MN 55317
P5_�t9sll.�#t3tt?iti!�.��e t?ax �t�
#august 2 t, 2011
I ar Mr. Ochme and C•hanhussen City Council Members,
This letter is in regards to the project'1'H ]III C:SAH IS (Lyman Blvd) to CSAH l4 {Pioneer Trail)
Project Goats
1) Improve safety for tro fie and p> i ple along the'ril 101 corridor tvliiie minirni7ing environmenad impacts
Rerdrrcre <•raxdex !n rlre esu+m p<,ssihlr•
,"I tune lanes io provide aY fa ranting marrm(wls (n imerxeo i(nu
h"JN-ovv xigln diaowe by n drrclrrg slwrp rmves and meep grades near inlarxevaomn
2) Improve capacity andconnectivity fiat people and goats along the Tti 101 corridor
Aceomnimlate rgrksnal and lrxal trunspartaUan nerds nJ onflelpoied puprdn/ian and empluvnrcut growth in the
TH J01 rarridnr• by incrvusi rrn�r cerpaoiiy
3) Provide iransponation solutions tha inimize envimnmanml impacts
.•lrnirlrrnininrl;aumirig<nc infix vx u»r anvirnnnra nar1, 8oc•W' awl raluuxrt rrsrnrrcr..
.tlinirni;e need Jiff nett Nght 41 •at• rukirrl;s from bwlne." and reckkmia! 1s•n errs
The project proposal appears to have a ressed sonic of the safety iftt• connectivity concerns. however
the cnvironmcntal impact ol'the projects uld be reconsicier�ed. The reconstruction of approximately
I mile of the existing two lane roadway to a r plus 11ni divided highway as described in the 115
pare environtuental impact assessment will sign caiilly change the landscape of the roadway and
ad#accnt area, removing 1000 plus trees, adding ho 'nr ponds and increasing traffic and noise levels.
The single plan presented tillers only 2 options, to proc�ed or leave as is. Alternative plans need to be
dcveIoped and presented that will -address all of -the projcc\the
ding minimizing environments#
impacts to the landscape.
As concerned cituens, we urgeyou to reconsider the impposed design, and work with the
community to develop a better solution, that will improve roadway while preserving
the natural beauty and chats A er ofthe surroundings for current and future gencratioinc.
O t7ac' Cn 1S C LSy fin1Jr
Signature: � �- Ir^t/'" _'.
Address:._,...., 7 = W. L1 A
2S.
Payne, Ashley
From: Oehme, Paul (poshme;§lcLchanhassen.mn,usj
Sent: Tuesday. August a 20114.09 PM
To: Larson, Chadd: tom, Jot
Subject FIN: HWY 101 Project
Sent from my Motomia phone.
----OdgMal Message Attached-•••--^
from: LESLIE O'HALLORAN < >
Sent: Toe Aug 2314:03:32 CDT 2011
To: *Oehme, Paul" < >
Subject: Hwy 101 Project
Paul,
Thank you for the time you spent with Carol and I this past week. It was good to have questions
answered and to see, with two other pairs of eyes, the possibilities,
Of course you would know that I'm completely against the total reconstruction of 101 and sincerely hope
that there will be a middle ground that will be comfortable for us all.
The private property/protected wetlands to the side of Pioneer Trail may be a side issue but possibly not.
In speaking with several neighbors, both on 96th St., Pioneer Trail and others east of 101, 1 found that
this has been a troublesome issue for many, and for a long time. It has been addressed many times, A
without resolution. You stated that putting a holding pond In that area would be the most cost effective
and sensible solution, but all other possibilities must be exhausted first. More and more water is ring
dumped in that area, properties are useless to the owners since we are prohibited from making any
improvement for ourselves. It feels like we've had land stolen, or at least, borrowed without being asked.
Could we please discuss the option of using land that Is already holding the excess water, to create a
proper container. It appears from listening to others, that you would have little opposition to that
solution.
Thank you again for your attention.
Leslie O'Halloran
26.
Paul Oetime, Chanhassen City Engineer
City of Chanhassen
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Box 147
Chanhassen. MN 55317
gg_qhMgjQpi3OAnhgpW.mn.us
August 23, 2011
Dear Mr. Oehme and Chanhassen City Council Members,
This letter is in regards to the project TH 101 CSAH 18 (Lyman Blvd) to CSAH 14 (Pioneer Trail).
I moved to Chanhassen recently due to the serene, wooded neighborhood Offered in this area. I am also a
proponent of improving the safety of the 101 corridor, as a resident of the area I have had many 'near misses".
is there away we can satisfy both safety and beauty? I am writing to ask you to consider more than one option
to both improve the safety AND maintain the environment Are alternate solutions available to improve the road A
without completely destroying the trees and surrounding neighborhoods? I have only seen one proposal to date
and am interested in seeing other options.
As a concerned citizen. I urge you to reconsider the impact of the proposed design, and work with the
community to develop a better solution, that will improve the safety of the roadway whrfe preserving the naturat
beauty and character of the surroundings for current and future generations.
Regards.
Tammy Gorsuch
9450 Po Rd
Chanhassen, MN 66317
95L0 l%(}:.:FOIy f3 Ro,m DAN 110assALL (.icx, MN 55,ti 86F,6
August 22, 2011
Paul Oehme, City Engineer
City of Chanhassen
PO Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Mr. Oehmc,
I spoke with you at a TH101 Project open house, addressed the City Council earlier
this month, and am now putting my remarks in writing- although there is nothing in
here you haven't already heardt
I understand most of the projeces goals, and in fact agree with the majority of them.
• I clearly seethe benefit of moving the Bandimere Park access;
• I clearly see the benefit of straightening the road as much as possible; and
• I clearly see the benefit of leveling the road.
Where we diverge is on the benefit of widening the road to five lanes, particularly when
one considers SH of the costs - something which I don't believe has been adequately
done yet.
• Please note that I am not talking only about the dollar cost to build the road at S
Imes rather than, say, 3. There is also considerable non -dollar cost to
landowners in terms of noise, traffic, especially tree loss character of the
neighborhood, and likely a loss of property value when the entire neighborhood
beam" less attractive.
• Thus, I see GREAT cost us. ALMOST NO benefit to the extra lanes - the five -lane
freeway just cannot be justified at this time.
I wish to emphasize that I am neither a wild-eyed tree -hugger, nor a NIMBY - my goat is
NOT to stop the entire project dead. I am willing to compromise on the design alter-
natives - as long as there are more than *no build' and "5-Iane t eeway" to cheer from!
So, what do I request from the City? Upton additional attenodVes, Hems a few
questions that might help;
• if the road could be narrower for now, perhaps it could be even straighter, with a
consequent reduction in environmental impact?
• Do we really need a 10-foot bike path on both sides? Removing the path on the
east side - our side -- is an inconvenience for only 4 properties.
• Could the project be done in multiple phases? My understanding is that the
follow-up project - that part of 101 south of Pioneer Trail - is a l0000ng way in
the future. Can we have a Phase I that reaps the bent of straightening and
leveldag, and hold off on building a freeeway until the ENTIRE route is ready?
Thank you for your consideration, and we look forward to working with you on a
mutually agreeable design.
Sincerely,
CITY 11
Dan Horaflit
27.
a
28.
Paul Oehmc, Chanhassen City Engineer
City of Chanhasscn
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 35317
pochrt g ci.chari AI cn.mn.us
August 22, 2011
Dear Mr. Ochme and Chanhassen City Council Members,
This letter is in regards to the project TH 101 CSAH IS (Lyman Blvd) to CSAH 14 (Pioneer Trail)
We have owned our residence in Lake Riley Woods neighborhood for nineteen years now. Our
property boarders the intended road improvement project.
From out of our back window, I have witnessed a number of accidents that were directly related to the
weakness of the engineering design of the current highway. I am concerned for the safety of my
family and friends while using that highway. I would suspect that the majority of neighbors in this
area would like to sec improvements to the many hazardous turns and blind spots in the Hwy. 101
roadway.
On the other hand, all of the ponds, lakes, marshes, and woodlands in this area make this a very
beautiful place to live and raise a family. Many of the neighbors in the area have spent a great deal of
time and money to enhance the natural beauty of this area. The stretch of highway 101 between Hwy
212 and Pioneer Trail may be one of the city's most scenic drives.
I have studied the proposed plan and have great concerns that while solving most of the safety
concerns, it will devastate the nature and environment in that area. The plats is far excessive and I
ima4ine costly to solve safety and traffic concerns that currently exist. Muth of the wetlands and
woods will he destroyed. A similar designed exit is just a short distance to the west and would appear
to address all the current and future traffic volumes that come off Hwy 212 and Pioneer trail. Wheal A
have driven offthe Powers exit there is always very modest traffic using that roadway. To build
another four lane highway just a short distance to the cast does not seem to make sense.
One clear example of the excess of the plan is to have a walking and bike trail on both sides of the
highway. This means another 15 to 20 feet of width that needs to come out of someone's home or our E
wooded property and wetlands.
I would appreciate you giving more consideration to a road project that conforms with the environment
and scope of t ne' bothood that exists there.
Signature•
THOMAS K CHERYL 1ESSEN
9570 FOXFORD ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
Attn: Paul Oehme 8-20-11
Chanhassen fatty Engineer
Re: TH101 from CSAH (Lyman Boulevard) to CSAH 14 (Pioneer Trail)
We have a few concerns about the TH101 Improvements from Lyman Blvd. to Pioneer Trail. While we
Wee with the goals of improving safety for people along TH101, such as fixing the steep grades and
sharp horizontal curves, we question the idea that a four lane divided highway with bike paths on both
sides is also needed. Could a two lane Ivory, with turn lanes and one bike path meet the goals? A two
lane hwy. with turn lanes and a single bike path would do less damage to the environment and not
completely destroy the natural beauty of the neighborhood of which we have all worked hard to create.
The natural beauty that brought us here in the first place will disappear when all of the trees are
removed and run off ponds are created forthe 4)ane Ivory, turn lanes, and two bike paths. Why must we
lose so many trees? MR any/atl be replaced? We definitely see this as a detriment to the environment.
Another concern we have is the new noise pollution that will be created when the project Is done. Noise
levels will Increase and we will not be able to have our windows open in the summer, nor will we be able
to sit in our back yard and carry on a conversation due to the noise. What will be done about the
increased noise? Will berms/walls be built? Our next concern is about the increase in air pollution. Has
the air quality been tested? What is the projected increase due to the new hwy.?What will be done to
insure we are breathing in clean air? We would also like to know If the speed limit for hwy.101 will be
increased. Finally we are concerned about our property values. Our properties will decrease in value
with a new 4lane hwy., will taxes be adjusted accordingly if 4 lane hwy.101 is constructed?
Hwy. 101 is the prettiest, most natural stretch of road in Chanhassen and we do not want that
destroyed.
Thank You,
Rose and Roger Novotny
SW Pineview Court
Chanhassen, Minn. 55317
952-496.1712
CITY
EisGttaw�w;.a..,t> �,nt,T
29.
30.
August 19th, 2011
Duke Zurek
President Board of Directors
Lake Riley Woods Homeowners Association
Paul Oehme
Chanhassen City Engineer
City of Chanhassen
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
RE: TH101from CSAH 18(Lyman Boulevard)tOCSAH 14(Pioneer Trail)
Dear Mr. Oehme and City of Chanhassen Officials,
I am writing on behalf of the take Riley Woods Homeowners Association, to comment on this project.
We are pleased that the City of Chanhassen supports improving the safety of this segment of TH101, and took
forward to traveling on a safer road. The safety concerns are valM.
At the same time, we were shocked to learn about the extent to which these road changes will destroy a large
section of the natural beauty that is a defining characteristic of this area As it exists today, this stretch of road is
one of the most beautiful roadways in Chanhassen. 1
More specifically. our concerns are as follows: �A
More than 1A00 trees will need to be clear-cut in order to make room for the expanded roadway. B
Noise levels are predicted to more than double. Even though the new noise levels are within federal �
guidelines, you will be turning a quiet neighborhood into a noisy one. c
A large holding pond will be built in our development, taking over % of one property alone.
Several neighbors will lose land, due to the extent of the project
When the City was in a dispute with Don Haifa, over the size and functionality of his sign, a City representative told
our community that it is Important -to preserve the character of this pan of Chanhassen'. The trees and natural
beauty of the drive along 101 as It currently exists are aho pan of the character of this area, and need to be
protected as well.
Another stated goat of this project is to provide transportation solutions that minimize environmental impacts. We
feel strongly that the City needs to more aggressively took for ways to minimize the environmental impact of this
project
A better design solution for this project, we believe, may include the following:
Keep the roadway at two lanes (versus four). This will help preserve the rural character of this part of
Chanhassen, and save over i AW trees. There are other roadways in Chanhassen that can support
connectivity with other communities including Powers Boulevard less than Y: mile away.
Stay with one bike path (versus two). The current path receives Ill use, and eliminating a path on one side E
of the road would significantly reduce the trees and property that treed to be removed and altered as a result.
Change the grade to the road as planned. improving the sightlines will be a welcome change and will make
TH 101 a safer road.
The LRWHA looks forward to working with the City to find a more acceptable solution for all of us, Please feel free
to reach out via email or phone to discuss further. dukez@applezoM 952.934.1260.
Sincerely,
Duke Zurek
31.
Payne, Ashley
From; Clehme. Paul (poehmeCd,chanhassen.mn.usj
Sent: Wednesday, August 24.2011 7:47 PM
To: Horn, Jon, Larson, Chadd
Subject: FIN: TH101 from CSAH 18 (Lyman Blvd) to CSAH 14 (Pioneer Trail)
Sent from my Motorola phone.
------Original Message Attached ------
From: Gayle Degler <adeglerJ09mail.crm>
Sent: Wed Aug 24 14,08:24 CDT 2011
To : "Oehme, Paul" <poehmeAci.chanhassen.mn.us>
Subject: TH101 from CSAH 18 (Lyman Blvd) to CSAH 14 (Pioneer Trail)
Hi Paull
3ust a quick note to relay our concerns for the Highway Project.
- The elevation of the intersection should not be raised. The reason being that our A
property and neighboring properties will be adversely affect because of additional noise and
visibility.
- The hill to the south should be cut down instead of raising the intersection. That
would provide noise abatement for people in that neighborhood.
- We have drain tile that surfaces at the intersection that could be affected with B
the change of elevation.
Gayle and Lois Degler
541 Pineview Ct
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Paul Ochmc, Chanhassen City Engineer
City of Chanhassen
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Box 147
Chanhassen, MN $3317
Dear Mr. Oehmc,
I sincerely appreciate the focus on the stretch of Highway 101 between Lyman and
Pioneer trail. The proposal as -is, while effective in improving sightlines and grades, is
overdesigned. This project has become a €tiWamental flaw in budgeting- we are getting
this design because it is the most road we could get for the money.
I ) The four -lane will dead-end at Pioneer Trail: there is no certain action to take
down the bluffs, as indicated in the project's executive summary (Pioneer to
Creekwood- Medium Priority; Creckwood to old 212- Low priority).
2) The west bike path and tunnel create no new utility. At Lyman, there are already
crosswalks in use to connect the 101-Lyman pathways.
3) if the City has information regarding development this project is designed to
assist, please include it in future communications as it is difficult to see whore the
development will come that requires we, "Accomodate regional and local
transportation needs of anticipated population and employment growth in the TH
101 corridor by increasing traffic capacity" (Project Newsletter#2, June 2011).
4) It is noted that the project includes extension of the trunk water main.
5) Feeder traffic from 169 West of Shakopee will be lessened if the State builds the
new Highway 41 crossing between 212 and 169. Anecdotal evidence suggests
traffic from Jordan and west already advantages 212 via the Hwy 25 River
Crossing in Jordan to County 1 I near Carver.
6) Improved gn de, sight lines and turn lanes will increase efficiency of traffic
movement creating less stopping and starting, allowing better flow and better
metering from traffic lights, without adopting a 4-lane strategy. The improved
two-lane can be a functional, metered relief artery with increased safety.
It is agreeable that that the grade and sightliutes be improved; however, a 4 lane divided
highway is beyond acceptable in this residential area The increased need in stone water
management is a byproduct of the overbuilt design that increases hard scope. The west
bike path and associated pedestrian tunnel will not increase utility of the park. The
project will dead-end at Pioneer Trail seating limited increase in utility connecting the
old 212 acid new 212. 1 encourage the final design to be less in scope than it is currently.
Very truly yours.
Rob Fuglie
9370 Foxford Road
Chanhassen, MN 55317
32. 33.
Ashley
From: dehme, Poul (poebmeQla chanhasaenrnn.us)
gent: Wednesday. August 2C 20117A2 PM
To: born, Jar Larson, C had8
Subject FW: TH101 frmhh CSM 18 (Lyman Boulevard) to CSAH 14 (Pioneer Treil)
Sent from my Motorola phone.
—Original Message Attached--••v
Fran: O*ryi Thiele <rhnnA thieiebtiotmail.com>
Sent: Wed Aug 2417:11:40 CDT 2011
To: "Oelhrne, Paul" <2gibme6d.chanbassen.mmus>
A Subject: TH101 from CSM 18 (Lyman Boulevard) to CSAH 14 (Pioneer Trail)
To whom it may concern,
$ On behalf of my household, lid like to express our worry and concern over the TH101 from MAN 18 (Lyman
Boulevard) to CSAH 14 (Pioneer Trail) proposed road project that is currently in its planning and design stage.
We are worried about the environmental impact that your latest design will have of our beautiful community.
We moved out to Chanhassen in 2007 all the way from Maple Grove because we felt that this area offered
I C both the privacy and seaiusion of country living, and the convenience of the city. One of the features we lave
most about living here is the quiet, untouched feel of such a beautiful place.
D We agree that work should be done to help make Hwy 101 more safe, however we strongly disagree on the A
extent to which the project is being taken. A sidewalk on both sides of the street seems completely
unnecessary. Also, extensive grade changes may not be necessary either. The problem is in the sharp curves
E of fhe road. Why not straighten out the road a bit .but leave the natural grade and, most importantly, replace 8
any trees that are taken in the new path? We feel that the large four -lane Powers Blvd close by serves larger
trucking traffic and fast traffic. Given this, It would be a sham to convert the beautiful strip of 101 to another
I industrial, lord highway.
F
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Randy and Cheryl Thiele
9591 Foxford Rd
Chanhassen, MN 65317
34.
Payne, Ashley
From: Oehme, Paul (poehmeQci.chanhassen.mn.usj
Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2011 7:57 PM
To: Han, Jon: Larson, Chadd
Subject: FW: TH 101 EAW Comments
Sent from my Motorola phone.
----Original Message Attadied- ---
From: Paul Paulson <oaul&sodeta.Wm>
Sent: Tue Aug 23 20:27:11 CDT 2D11
To: "Oehme, Paul" < >
Cc : David Blank} < >
Subject: TH 101 EAW Comments
Mr. Oheme,
In general, I support improvements to the Highway 101 corridor for safety and efficiency reasons, but would
like submit the following comments for consideration:
It appears that this project will have a dramatic effect on the character of the roadway, especially in
regards to the loss of trees. TH 101 is one of the most beautiful sections of roadway in the entire A
southwest, inctro area and its character will be sorely missed by local residents and visitors alike. Please
attempt to reduce the number oftroes to be removed, cspecialfytho large oaks.
Please consider realigning our driveway and Mr. Blanski's with the entrance to W iison's Northwest
Nursery. The new roadway will cause hardship with regards to snow removal, retrieval oftnail on the
cast side of the road and access from the south, tf dic driveway cannot be aligned with the Wilson B
property entrance then please consider rebuilding the portion of the driveway connecting to the roadway
since the new alignment will result in an unacceptable steep grade on the approach. This is especially an
issue in the wintertime for show removal and general safety in slippery conditions.
Plc= find an alternative to removing the trees on the cast side of the Blanksi property. Loss of those
trees will diminish the value of both of our properties since it opens up sight lines directly to the park C
and roadway. Removal ofthose trees will also increase noise levels.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely.
Paul D. Paulson
Paid D. Paulson
Sodela, Inc.
952.484.2698
pau14"cr sodcla.com
35,
Paul Oehme, Chanhassen City Engineer 22Aug 2011
City of Chanhassen
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Dear Mr. Oehme and Chanhassen City Council members,
With regards to the proposed Hwy 101 expansion from Lyman Blvd to Pioneer Trail, I would first like to say that i have
no issue nor disagreement with the concept that Hwy 101 could and should be improved. Fixing the sharp cures and
turns should help the runoff accidents, and perhaps, if correctly designed, (unlike the intersection of Powers and
Lyman), could reduce the higher accident frequency at the Intersections as well.
However, I seriously question the need for the overall magnitude of the project. Do we realty need, or can we justify,
another 5 lane "freeway" to nowhere? Until there is a plan for the "over the bluff' Hwy 101 improvement, and a final
decision on the new river -crossing bridge location, why build 5 tones to Halla7 It's less than a half -mile from Powers
Blvd..., a 5-lane underused feeder road. This whole project seems like the perfect example of over -engineering and
poor stewardship of taxpayers' money.
The fact that the environmental assessment does not even mention that hundreds of mature trees will be destroyed as
result of this project snakes me question the credibility of the entire report. There Is no discussion of the negative B
impact of the holding ponds or the loss of forest. The measurement of potential noise impact is weak and
misrepresented.
As drawn, this highway will destroy over 1000 mature trees along its 1 mile route. There has been nothing discussed in
the plans about 1) compensating the landowners for the loss of trees and property value; 2) providing relief, such as
berms, for the increased visual pollution and noise level that will obviously occur as a result of the tree removal, 3)
providing replacement plantings for that loss.
After surviving 25 years of "progress" in SW Eden Prairie, I expect at a minimum that the City of Chanhassen would
support its citizens by following its own guidelines for developers.... That for each tree removed, the developer must
plant two. Secondly, I would expect the city to require additional information for the Environmental impact
statement.... Specifically, measure each and every tree that will be destroyed, to determine diameter inches for
replacement. And provide this information with possible highway design alternatives.... Such as..... 2lanes plus turn
lanes rather than 5; bike path on one side rather than on both sides, etc, and then measure the etist(benefit of each
ion.
it is highly probable that considering some design alternatives might give us what we all want..._ a re -graded, safer
highway, with better access points, while keeping the beautiful tree tined character that it currently has, without
destroying trees and property esthetics and values.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Kathy Horsfail
9610 Foxford Road
Chanhassen, MN 55317
36.
Paul Ociune, Chanhassen City Engineer
City of Chanhassen
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 35317
poehme(eilci,chanhassen.inn,us
August 23, 2011
Dear Mr. Oclvne and Chanhassen City Council Members,
This letter is in Regards to the project 111101 CSAH 18 (Lyman Blvd) to CSAH 14 (Pioneer Trail)
I am not a civil engineer so 1 suppose you can tell me where I am wrong but it seems to me that
if Pioneer Trail fwictions as a two lane road with its traffic volume, this stretch of TH 101 should be
able to work as a two lane road also with some flattening, a bit of straightening, a turn lane or two, and
changing the location of the entrance to Bandimere Park (for safety). I agree with others that it is a
very positive thing if we can leave some parts of Chanhassen with a bit of the rural, wooded feeling.
This is the character that attracted some of us to the commmunity in the first place. A four lane road
with walking/biking paths on both sides would be overwhelming to die area. A
I would encourage you to work with the community to develop a two IBM solution that is safer
than the current configuration but that minimizes the impact to the current tree lined road. If your
goals and state requirements cannot be met with a two lane plan, then I would support leaving the load $
as it is. Given the current economic situation and the liact that government units on all levels need to
reduce spending, perhaps this is one area where spending could be avoided with minimal impact to the
community.
Signature.•
Ames Wiese
9410 Foxford Road
Chanhassen, MN S5317
Respectfully I want to forward my negative comments concerning the Highway 101 Project ; August 21,
20111. 1 am not in favor of the project to continue as currently proposed.
i have learned that representatives of Chanhassen have been working with representatives of the MN
Department of Transportation and Carver County to identify a "preferred design" for the reconstruction
of Highway 101 between Lyman Boulevard and Pioneer Trail. i understand the parameters are to
reduce crashes, provide safe turning at intersections reduce sharp curves and steep grades and to
prepare for the future reconstruction of Highway 101 south to Shakopee.
We all look forward to the time that our City representatives can communicate and share what they
have "planned" for its residents before participating In discussions that the local residents do not
approve. Recently, i learn from my neighbors that the City and other Government Officials have plotted
yet another expenditure of public funds that we do not even Navel Even more outrageous is the fact
that the City and others have conspired to do this and then say that they can satisfy the above
parameters while now providing:
An increase in road noise to the Community
An increase in the pollution of our Community
An Increase In traffic through our Community so that residents of another neighboring County can use
our community to drive from their County to the interstate highway system without the smallest benefit
to Chanhassen
An increase in the safety concerns of Chanhassen residents due to the increased speeds and number of
vehicles on the roadway
A dramatic decrease In wooded land and character along one of the major streets of our Community
A further decrease in the area where the local birds and small animals can live without human interface
Continuing government balance sheets that indicate we are spending funds that do not exist and must
be financed
I understand this Improvement dramatically changes the character; function and capacity of Highway
101 in southern Chanhassen. This area of Chanhassen Is one of the only areas that the City has not
emulated into Eden Prairie and Hennepin County yet. The reasons why most people moved to
Chanhassen 20.25 years ago was because this area was quiet, responsible, and scenic while still dose to
the large metropolitan area. Currently Highway 101 in southern Chanhassen is not a perfect road, but
an adequate road and from someone who drives the road each day is hardly encumbered by traffic even
during the heavy commuter hours of the day.
On a global scale other arteries nearby have been well constructed and provide principal access from
the South to the North. West of here; Highway 41 and its portal over the Minnesota River, and
continuing with County Road 15 and its requisite Powers Blvd provide access to Highway 212 easily from
37.
the South. Neighbors of central Shakopee and others nearby obviously commute North and South along
Highway 101 each day. For anyone to decide that this portion of road needs to provide additional
capacity in the magnitude considered apparently does not value the opinion of its residents, had not
considered the economic folly of this undertaking and finally does not appreciate how our Community
was again ranked among the top small towns in Minnesota and the US.
My opinion is to improve the Highway but in a much smaller scale than what is currently under
consideration. Specific recommendations are as follows:
• Maintain the current intersection configurations at Highway 101 and the Intersection of both
Pioneer Trail and Lyman Boulevard. These Intersections both provide turning tones, are both
recently improved and rarely if ever cause traffic problems.
• Do not add two additional lanes along with turning lanes and a median and an additional
biking/pedestrian trail along the project route.
• Add select turning lanes at W 96'h Street and Kowa Trails. Along with these turning lanes in this
area, strengthen and flatten the road by utilizing the area to the west of the existing road. That
area would benefit from a more managed wetland area. Consider that displacement of the
residents along the west side of the existing Highway 101 may provide positive benefit to the
residents themselves along with all others in the nearby area and the entire community.
• The road will require additional costs for construction over the current area of wetland between
W 96s' Street and Kiowa Trails, but the total cost of the project will be far less than the original
concept of the project,
• If the new road requires a vertical nor nearly vertical wall to support the current scenic area
where the biking/pedestrian paths are located adjacent to the Kiowa Trail/W 96th Street area,
build a rock wan and increase the character of the area, do not cut the trees down and fashion
the land with man-made concrete, poles and transplanted grasses.
• Maintain only one biking/pedestrian trail along Highway 101. Use the current trail along the
east side of the street with little change necessary,
• Finally, please consider responsible engineering firms to design this roadway so that we do not
utilize the existing faulty subsurface conditions that cause heaving of the road each winter.
I predict if the City would suggest the far simpler, less expensive and less intrusive project described
above it can still claim they have made an attempt at reduced crashes, provided safe turning at
intersections reduced sharp curves and steep grades and prepared for the future reconstruction of
Highway 101 south to Shakopee. They ran further boast that they utilized and considered the opinions
and suggestions from the local residents and still maintained and preserved Chanhassen"s character,
economy, resources and safety.
David Gatto
9631 Foxford Road
Chanhassen,MN 55317
38.
Payne Ashley
From: Ciehme. haul Ipoehme@d.d3anhassen.mn.usj
Sent, Friday, August 19, 2011 8.30 AM
To: Horn, Jon
Subject: FW: TH 101 EAW Comments
Paul Oehme, P.E.
Doecta d PuMit wa'k11C4 E1vOecr
City.f Chanfta-
7700 Nobles BoWcwaM
PO. Edo 147
Chanhms , MN 55117
Ph,a852•?77.17Y9
&Yn$t2; ••••"�^•nNLi flh+e< nt„•lq
pa,_n.__. _ .__.. _ _......._ ___ _.._.,,.__._.. ....... __.,__ ..,_..._...._......o..,_....... ,.
From: David elanski fmailto:dayeblatiskitttefamlly nett
Sent: Thursday, August 18,10119:57 PM
To: Oehme, Paul
Cc: ciauldlisodela.mm
Subject: TH 101 FAW Comments
S
Mr. Oheme, i have tried to limit my following comments to areas discussed in the 101 EA/EAW.
please forgive me if at times l have drifted astray.
Pg 5. & Net Benefits section Pgs, 5A 6. Where are the referenced "blind trail crossings'? The only 1A
existing marked trail crossing In the construction area is at the intersection of 101 & Pioneer Trail, and
it is hardly blind.
C
Pg. 6, AAOT traffic counts from 2008 do not reflect the resulting reduction in traffic volume on 101 s
that residents have observed after highway 212 was fully opened.
' A Pg, 6. A stated goal is to improve safety for residents along 101.1tow does it enhance the safety of myself and
my neighbor, our children, visitors, delivery drivers, and oncoming traffic, if we are forced to snake a U turn
D each time we conic or go? Is it environmentally sound to force drivers to waste gas and increase pollution?
We are busy families with lots of comings and goings. The proposed ten foot wide entrance is too narrow for
two can to pass, This choke point, located at the base of a hill, is inviting an accident,especially during the
winter months. No increased safety here.
The new entrance, when built as designed, will result in an increase to the driveways' slope.The existing
slope has been almost impossible to plow going up hill after a heavy storm, The plow driver often had to back
across the street into the neighbors driveway in order to get a run at it.This will be impossible with a center C
median in place.Whcn plowing down hill the snow was placed on my }awn along 101. With this location given
to the highway, what are we to do? Can't push it up or down.
A much better alternative would be a design that allows us to share the wide entrance to Wilson
Nursery.
Pg. 7.Crash data for the period 2007 that 2009. Has the data been reviewed to reflect the recent �D
improvements, to include: resurfacing, curb and gutter section, guard rail installation, and the traffic
signal at Pioneer Trail?
Pg. 12.Usage. It is entirely possible that 50,000 or more use the park annually. living across the street
from the current entrance I see multiple vehicles carrying participants and their gear to sports events, E
but I have never see anyone walking in from the west side with their gear to participate. What study
has been done to justify the need for a tunnel? In this time of high unemployment and budget deficits
it seems like a gigantic waste of money, If it does go forward I hope it is designed so no surface
drainage enters, making it icy and dangerous any time the temperature fails, as is the case with the
existing tunnel near St. Huberfs Church.
Pg. 16. Traffic noise: It is stretching credibility to say that'traffic noise will not substantially increase"
considering all the trees, bushes and brush that are to be removed in this projecLOn my small property alone I
have planted six parallel rows of bushes across from the park entrance for noise mitigation. The minimum
vegetation to be lost on my parcel is: 5 Highbush Cranberry,14 Dogwood,12 burning bush, 8 Spirea, 75 Lilac, g
20 Raspberry, 17 Sumac, 2 Maples, 2 green Ash, 1 Ponderosa pine, i Basswood, 2 White Spruce, 43 Elm, and,
4 Large Oaks all over a century old, and a multitude of random growth busbes trees, and grasses. It brings me to
tears to see these and other roadway trees go. It changes the character of the entrance to Chanhassen
dramatically, and in my opinion negatively. The foliage along this route helps reduce vehicle emissions through
carbon exchange, and should be an environmental consideration.
Appendix B Pg. 8. The first paragraph begins "There are no steep slopes or highly erodible soils
present within the project site." This statement is negated by Appendix D Pg. 2. where it states in part
that "impacts to wetland five have been reduced significantly by using steep side slopes". And again G
in Appendix H Pg. 8. where it speaks of "steep slopes" and the "adjacent TH 101 right of way". Also the need
for the planned retaining walls provides obvious evidence for the occurrence of steep slopes being
exposed during construction. A cynic might say the reason for the first sentence is that someone does not want
to design, and pay for, a lot of BMP'S.
Thank you for the opportunity to submit these comments
David R. Blanski
Payne, Ashley
From: Oehme. Paul (poehme&a.chanhassen.mmus)
sent: Wednesday, August 24. 2011 P43 PM
To: Hom, Jon, Larson, Chadd
subject: FW: TH101 CSAH18 to CSAH14
Sent from my Motorola phone.
—Original Message Attached ----
From: Darcy Loffler <ddiofner*mchsl.cnm>
Sent: Wed Aug 2416:24:40 CDT 2011
To: "Oehme, Paul" < >
Subject: TH101 CSAH18 to CSAH14
Dear Mr. Oehme and Chanhassen City Council Members,
As a resident who travels highway 101 every day, I look forward to travelling on a safer
stretch of roadway. I do hope that this can be done with minimal impact on the environmental
landscape.
As a concerned citizen, i urge you to reconsider the proposed design, to Doe that improves the
safety, while preserving the natural beauty and character of this unique part of the metropolitan
area.
Thank you.
Darcy Loffler
9471 Foxford Road
Chanhassen 55317
39.
40.
August 22, 2011
Paul Oehme
Chanhassen City Engineer
City of Chanhassen
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
RE: TH101 from CSAH 18 (Lyman Boulevard) to CSAH 14 (Pioneer Trail)
Paul,
From the big picture of this project, I am glad to hear that we will have a safer road. I'm looking
forward to improved sightiines along that stretch of road.
However, the current design goes far beyond what is required to improve the safety of TH 101.1
am surprised that City Staff and the City Council would promote and support a project that
would destroy so much of the natural beauty of this part of Chanhassen. This indeed is one of
the most beautiful drives in Chanhassen.
More specifically, 1 am concerned about the following:
- More than 1,000 trees will be dearcut to make room for the expanded roadway
- Noise levels are predicted to more than double. Even though the new noise levels are
within federal guidelines, you will be turning a quiet neighborhood into a noisy one.
- While connectivity is a goal of this project, there already is a major improved road close to
us (Powers). How many major arteries do we need?
- A large holding pond will be built in our development, taking over % of one property
Several neighbors will lose land. due to the extent of the project
I will tose .44 yes. which includes part of a restored prairie that took over 19 years to
develop to its current state as a mature prairie.
My understanding is that the majority of this area (.44 apes) will be a temporary easement that
will be used to create a gradual grade from my property down to the road. This isn"t as simple
as stripping the land, then reseeding with bluegrass. Besides the expense of professionally
preparing, then reseeding with both grasses and flowers, it will take several years of
professional maintenance until that area of prairie is back to where it was.
I invested thousands of dollars in site preparation, seeding, and professional annual
maintenance to bring our prairie to its current state of development. Will the City of
Chanhassen make the same investment over several years to restore what will be destroyed?
When the City was in a dispute with Don Halia, over the size and functionality of his sign, a City
representative told us that it is important to preserve the character of this part of Chanhassen.
The trees and natural beauty of the drive along 101 as it currently exists are also part of the
character of this area, and needs to be protected as well.
Twenty years ago, when one of my neighbors wanted to get his occupancy permit from the City
of Chanhassen, he was told by a member of Staff that he needed to plant a tree before he G
would receive the permit My neighbor thought the staff member was kidding. He wasn't. Isn't it
Ironic that today, on the other side of the very same development, the City sees no problem in
dear cutting all of the trees bordering the same properties?
I feel strongly that the City needs to more aggressively look for ways to minimize the
environmental impact of this project.
I believe that a better design solution is as follows:
- Keep the roadway at two lanes (versus four). This will help preserve the rural character of
this part of Chanhassen, and save over 1,000 trees. There are other roadways in
Chanhassen that can support connectivity with other communities. H
- Stay with one bike path (versus two). The current path receives tittle use, and eliminating a
path on one side of the road will significantly reduce the trees and property that need to be
removed and/or altered as a result.
- This project feels over4he-top, over -engineered and wasteful to me. Either save the excess
1i funding or put it to better use in generating jobs.
i A - Change the grade to the road as planned. Improving the sightlines will be a welcome
t a change and will make TH 101 a safer road.
IC I look forward to working with the City to find a more acceptable solution for all of us.
Regards,
D
Dave Wondra
E 9590 Foxford Road
Chanhassen, MN 55317
I<>E>A
Payne, Ashley
From: Oehme, Paul [poehme@d.chanhsssen.mn.usj
Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2011 7:59 PM
To: Larson, Chadd; Hom, Jon
subjeot: FW: Hwy 101
Sent from my Motorola phone.
------Original Message Attached —
from: "Qutditbvmecmaol.com^ <OutridedrmyaDad.mm>
Sent: Tue Aug 2312:18:34 CDT 2011
To: "Oehme, Paul" c >
Subject: Hwy 101
August 20, 2011
Dear Mr. Paul Oehme and Others Involved with the 101 Project,
Where to begin? First we need to find a better way to make sure persons impacted by the project for SURE A
get the notice of the hearing. If you talk to people on West 96'" Street, most did not get the notice or we
would have been there in force.
I have attended the meetings in the past and would have attended this one if we would have known about it.
After reading the Villager and the minutes, it is sound like all the other meetings. In the past concerns are , B
shared, but it stills goes to what the city planned in the first place. let's see some changes made that the
people have expressed from the August 8, 2011 City Council Meeting.
You were talking about the topography and Paul Oehme mentioned the area is high at the Intersection of 960'
Street. How is this different then it is now? It's a terrible turn out of 96'° because of the hill (and the curve).
C
Jamie Hellicher talked about Kiowa. As a taxpayer, why do we need to wait on the Klowa to Springfield? it
really shouldn't be a completely separate item. The intersection and wetlands is a big issues and could save
money and wetlands. This street was never meant to be a cul-de-sacs.
Dan Horsfali brought up many great points and is backed by a number of people i have talked to. I feel if you
throw out the plan for a three lane vs. five lanes it would be more pleasing to everyone involved, save money,
make the road safer if still leveling and straightening the road and give the same benefits needed for this
area. The trail on the northwest side of Pioneer Trail is definitely Is needed. We are trapped on our street.
You have a street with 16 kids, a daycare, and no way to get across 101 without putting our lives in danger. i
walk In the mornings and I am scared crossing the road, image a kid crossing with you and freezes when
crossing because they see a car. This happened to our neighbors. Does a child need to get killed before we
have a trail on our side? When you get to the trail on the east side it takes you into the woods and you feel
like you are up north because ofthe beautiful tall pine trees. If you havenY walked this trail before, you really
should to understand the beauty of it. I have friends from the city drive out here and every single one
comments on how beautiful it is here by our road. !et us keep the beauty and get rid of the thoughts that we
need wider roads and more noise. We got the noise from 212 we do not need more.
Last I would like to askyou to put your feet in all of our shoes. If you lived in one of these houses on or near
101, would you want a five lane road that leads to Hal la? Would you want all these majestic trees taken so
your city looks like every other city around us? OR Do you want an area people talk about and know to be part
of your city?
Sincerely,
Terri Byme
700 West 96""' Street
15111041
This is concerning the 101 Project.
I have noticed that the County 101 signs changed to State Highway 101. Does this have to do with
receiving any money to improve this roadway? The reason I ask is I don't see that this highway is busy A
enough to warrant hardly any changes. So why would money be spent on a project that isn't needed?
Especially in today economy. I would like to know who is behind this change?
We have Powers Blvd, which has been leveled and is baron. It is a great thru street to 212. Trucks or
�B
cars can easily use this road if the weather is bad.
I realize 101 can be a bit treacherous in the winter, but the scenic aspect is the best in the City. This
road is apart of the unique piece of our City that i feet shouldn't change. If anything put in a middle (C
lane for turns lanes. So only 3 lanes wide would be the only change i would approve.
If you pass what your suggestion was for a 5 lane highway, this only encourages trucks and many more D
cars to use this roadway. We can hear the noise from 212 so 1 can't even image if the noise level could
double how this beautiful, serene area will be destroyed with noise pollution and traffic.
We moved to Chanhassen 20 years ago. We have 2.5 acres and a few of my neighbors will lose a
significant portion of their land. If you know anything about our neighborhood you would know that our
39 homes are very unique due to the acreage and lovely foliage we all have all planted over the years. E
We are all concerned for the noise level and traffic levels this will bring to our neighborhood. We all
stick together pretty well as neighbors and fight for what we feel is destroying our beauty that we all
bought into. We have already noticed the speed limit increased 5 miles per hour north of 212 on
Highway 101 and we are also afraid this will happen once you make it a 5 lane road.
I am definitely opposed to this change and I hope you consider what beauty our neighbors have brought
to this part of Chanhassen and how quickly you could ruin Its
Thank you for hearing me out.
Sharon Gatto
9631Foxford Road
Chanhassen, MN
43.
Paul Oehme, Chanhassen City Engineer
City of Chanhassen
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Box 147
Chanhassen, MIN 55317
August 22, 2011
Dear Mr. Ocltme and Chanhassen City Council Members,
This letter is in regards to the project TH 101 CSAH 18 (Lyman Blvd) to CSAH 14 (Pioneer Trail)
It was very enlightening to be apart of the August 8 City Council's Public hearing on this manner. I
would like to address your goals as stated in your plan.
Goal 1) Improve safety for traftk and people along the TH 101 corridor while ntalmizing environmental impacts
I agree with the needs for improving safety along this road to benefit our conumo ity.
Goal 2) improve capaeity and connectivity for people and goods along the TH 101 corridor
I question the need to improve capacity along the 101 corridor in the extent that is proposed without a
future plan for 101 south of Pioncer Trail. Your plan is a 5 lane highway dropping south onto a road
that is significantly more dangerous tttan the northern section. I work in Shakopee and commute south
on 101 from Pioneer Trail on a regular basis. Now this southern section is a definite safety concern
even at present. Increasing Hway 101 traffic north of Pioneer Trail will only further increase traffic
traveling south. Has that safety impact been considered? Any future potential Codifications south
would require even more significant funding, road modifications and not to speak of it's environmental
impact, Consideration of further long -terns goals and planning of tiway 101 in its entirety into
Shakopee needs to be considered.
Goal 3) Provide tram portation solutions that mtaimize environmental impacts
t have grave concerns ofthe present proposal's maximal, not minimal, environmental impact.
Minimizing environmental impact is listed in the first and third goal yet question the full sincerity and
consideration within the proposal. Your "acceptable noise' level increase is not acceptable to those
who live in this community. Add to the unacceptable impact is the damage that will be done to our
existing prairie which had been planted and is maintained by Prairie Restorations. Perhaps you needed
to be reminded once again ofthe significant tree removal in our area and in our community. This
corridor is a beautiful entryway into Chanhassen. Your proposal will strip this all away. Ifyour goal is
indeed to minimize the environmental impact, further options need to be considered. A part ofthis
plan needs to address specifically what the plan is financially and esthetically to replace what will be
taken away from our community if the goal is truly to minimize environmental impact.
The present option is not an acceptable option. Presently it seems it is the only option. I appreciate the
extent ofthe research that has been done to this point. Beyond the research, there is the need to pause
and address improved options for achieving your stated goals. I pray that our concerns are seriously
considered and addressed. Please consider what truly is best for all of us who live, work and support
this beautiful Chanhassen community.
Respectfully,
Roselee Wondra 9590 Foxford Road
APPENDIX B
RESPONSES TO COMMENTS
AGENCIES
1. US EPA
Comment 1A: We have no major concerns with the proposal as long as adequate mitigation
measures to protect resources in the project study area are incorporated into project design,
construction and operation.
Response: Comment noted.
2. Army Corps of Engineers
Comment 2A: We concur with your preliminary assessment that a Department of the Army
permit may be needed for this project. We look forward to receiving your request for a
jurisdictional determination and permit application.
Response: Comment noted. A jurisdictional determination request and permit application will
be submitted as final design details become available and impacts are refined.
3. Minnesota PCA
Comment 3A: MPCA has reviewed the EAW and has no comments at this time.
Response: Comment noted.
Comment 3B: Please note that this letter does not constitute PCA approval of the project and
that it is the responsibility of the City to obtain necessary permits prior to construction.
Response: The City of Chanhassen is aware of the PCA permit requirements and will obtain
directly, or through its contractors, the appropriate permits for construction.
4. Minnesota DNR
Comment 4A: The DNR has reviewed the EA/EAW for the TH 101 project located in the City
of Chanhassen. The project as proposed will require fill being placed in DNR Public Water
Wetland 10-215W and is subject to DNR Public Waters Work permitting authority. The DNR
Area Hydrologist should be contacted for DNR authorization. The Area Hydrologist may waive
the impacts to the WCA LGU (the City of Chanhassen) if the impacted area of 10-215W is less
than 1 acre.
Response: The City of Chanhassen is aware of the DNR Public Water Wetland permit
requirements and will obtain the appropriate permits for construction.
5. Metropolitan Council
Comment 5A: The Council finds that the project does not require an EIS.
Response: Comment noted.
Comment 5B: The EA/EAW does not mention the TH 101 Regional Trail planned for this
corridor. The Carver County 2030 Comprehensive Plan identifies a proposed TH 101 Regional
Trail, which connects the Minnesota River Bluffs LRT Regional Trail to the Lake Minnetonka
Regional Trail.
Response: The Metropolitan Council correctly notes that the Carver County 2030
Comprehensive Plan identifies the need and plan for a regional trail along TH 101. The City is
aware of this plan and has accommodated this trail and the tunnel crossing identified in that plan.
Findings of Fact and Conclusions TH 101 (CSAH 18 to CSAH 14)
November 2011 SP 194-010-011 B -1
Comment 5C: The Twin Cities Master Water Supply Plan identified a number of issues that
need to be addressed if water appropriations increase within the boundaries of the city.
Response: No changes in water appropriations are included as a part of these improvements. A
construction dewatering permit will be obtained by the contractor, if needed for construction of
the roadway or utilities.
Comment 5D: Council staff recommends use of curb 5524 instead of curb B624 to minimize
potential impact on turtle movements.
Response: Comment noted. The curb design will be evaluated as a part of the final design
process for the project.
Comment 5E: The EA/EAW provides conflicting statements regarding steep slopes and highly
erodible soils. The EAW should be revised to be consistent with erosion concerns described in
the EA.
Response: Page 8 of 28 of the EAW incorrectly noted there were no steep slopes in the corridor.
Steep slopes are present within the project area. The other statements in the EA and EAW (Page
11 of 28 of the EAW and page 5 of 19 of the EA) correctly identify the steep slopes in the
corridor. These slopes are the cause for some areas to have a moderate risk of soil erosion which
would be addressed through standard erosion control measures.
6. Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek WD
Comment 6A: Please provide a copy of the wetland boundary delineation.
Response: The wetland boundary has been delineated and reviewed with the Technical
Evaluation Panel. The delineation report will be provided at the time the permit application is
prepared.
Comment 6B: Please provide a shoreland zone map for Lake Riley and indicate who determine
that no additional requirements are needed.
Response: Shoreland Zone Map is provided in Exhibit A. City Code governs the shoreland
criteria, (Chapter 20, Article VII), and there are no "additional' requirements that have not or will
not be met by the storm water system design and erosion and sediment control practices to be
employed during construction activity.
Comment 6C: Has consideration been given to LID practices to decrease impervious surfaces?
Response: Yes. LID practices have been considered throughout development of the preliminary
design process. The green areas in the park entry and parking lot area may be used for
infiltration/filtration systems (e.g., rain water gardens) and the extent of infiltration that may be
obtained will be determined in the final design process. Pervious pavement was specifically
considered in some areas including the parking lot and the use of porous pavement in the parking
stall portions of the entry will be evaluated further during the final design stages. However, at this
stage of the design, the more cost effective approach to obtaining the required treatment was to
use wet ponds for the roadway segments and rain water gardens in the areas surrounding the park
entry drive and parking areas.
Comment 61): Please provide additional information on infiltration design, storm water drainage
plan, and hydraulic modeling for vegetated ditches.
Response: The filtration basin would be located in the park entry area. The exact location will be
refined during the final design stages and the level of infiltration/filtration that might be obtained
will be refined as the design advances and after site -specific soils information is obtained for the
final location of this/these feature(s). A drainage memo has been completed for the preliminary
design and can be provided to the watershed. Other details regarding storm water design and
Findings of Fact and Conclusions TH 101 (CSAH 18 to CSAH 14)
November 2011 SP 194-010-011 B -2
modeling will be available after final design plans are more advanced. These details will be
included in the required permit application.
Comment 6E: Provide plans that show protection measures for ponds, wetlands, and other
surface waters.
Response: Detailed plans for erosion control will be provided as final design plans are refined
and permit application information is prepared.
Comment 6F: The District has a Municipal Roadway Grant program for projects such as this
which implement LID design components.
Response: Comment noted.
7. This number intentionally left blank.
FORM LETTER COMMENTS
Comments 8 thru 19, and 22 are the same and are represented by comment 8A to 8B. Comments 20 and
21 provided comments in addition to the form letter and are represented by comments 20A and 21 A.
8 through 19 and 22.
Comment 8A: Alternative plans need to be developed and presented that will address all of the
project goals, including minimizing the environmental impacts to the landscape.
Response: The purpose of the project is to improve traffic safety, capacity, and connectivity
issues on TH 101 between Lyman Boulevard and Pioneer Trail in the City of Chanhassen. As
outlined in the City's May 2007 Corridor Scoping Study and the Draft EA/EAW, the City has
looked at other alternatives to address the project purpose and need. The other alternatives were
determined to have greater environmental impacts than the preferred alternative. The City will
continue to work with individual property owners during final design to further try to minimize
impacts to trees and property.
Comment 813: Reconsider the impact of the proposed design that will improve roadway safety
while preserving the character of the surroundings.
Response: The City has considered a narrower roadway cross-section, a two-lane design section
instead of a four -lane section. Looking only at capacity and traffic volume projections, a two-
lane design is nearly at maximum capacity by year 2030. As a result, the 2007 corridor study
determined that a four -lane section was appropriate for this segment and the segment to the south
to meet long-range regional capacity needs. Additionally, when comparing the impacts of a two-
lane roadway cross-section with the needed turn lanes and trail, to the four -lane section, the
impacts were not substantially smaller with a two-lane section. Thus the City believes the four -
lane project, with minor adjustments to the design to minimize tree impacts, is the alternative that
best meets the project purpose with minimal impacts.
20. Pam O'Neill
Comment 20A: The commentor is opposed to the removal of more than 1,000 trees and does not
believe there is a need for a four -lane parkway.
Response: See responses to Comment 8A and B regarding alternatives. The number of trees that
will be removed will be minimized to the extent possible through final design refinement and
coordination with property owners. The exact number of trees to be removed has not been
quantified.
Findings of Fact and Conclusions TH 101 (CSAH 18 to CSAH 14)
November 2011 SP 194-010-011 B -3
21. Delaney O'Neill
Comment 21A: Commentor does not see there is a crash issue and would like to keep
everything the way that it is and somehow make it safer with a more reasonable alternative.
Response: The City cannot make the meaningful safety improvements by making no changes.
The crash statistics were provided in the Draft EA/EAW documenting the need for safety
improvements. In order to correct the horizontal and vertical alignment deficiencies, alignment
shifts are required which will result in some impacts outside the existing right of way. The City
has and will try to minimize these impacts through its final design process.
CITIZEN AND CITIZEN GROUPS
23. Douglas and Rebecca Duchon
Comment 23A: Draft EA/EAW only presents one alternative.
Response: See response to Comments 8A and B. The state EAW and federal EA environmental
review process typically evaluate one alternative that has been selected based on the project
purpose and need and an alternatives evaluation process that is a precursor to the EA/EAW
evaluation. The appropriate process has been followed for this project.
Comment 2313: Notes there is a lack of support to justify expanding roadway, creating
significant runoff issues.
Response: As noted in response to Comment 61), low impact development concepts will be
considered during final design to reduce storm water runoff from this project. In addition, three
stormwater ponds are proposed to attenuate downstream runoff rates to be less than or equal to
current rates.
Comment 23C: Destruction of native prairie, wildlife habitat, and natural sound barriers without
replacement.
Response: The City will work with property owners to identify replacement options for lost
prairie and trees.
Comment 231): There is a lack of support for two parallel trails.
Response: As noted by the Metropolitan Council in Comment 513, the trail being added to this
corridor is to comply with the Carver County 2030 Comprehensive Plan for the TH 101 Regional
Trail connection. This trail has regional significance and will serve a regional connection that
extends beyond the local residents.
Comment 23E: Concerned with addition of storm ponds which will require new right of way
from property owners and pose a safety and maintenance concern to residents.
Response: The ponds are designed with a safety bench (shallow 10:1 slope below water line).
The City will maintain the ponds to remove accumulated sediment. Metropolitan Mosquito
Control will likely treat the ponds as needed for mosquitoes.
Comment 23F: See response to Comment 20A. Concerned with the magnitude of tree loss, and
lack of tree replacement plan required by ordinance for most development.
Response: The City will work individually with property owners to minimize tree loss and
relocate and/or replace trees where possible.
Comment 23G: Concerned with potential for increased noise and air impacts due to loss of
trees.
Findings of Fact and Conclusions TH 101 (CSAH 18 to CSAH 14)
November 2011 SP 194-010-011 B -4
Response: Based on the air and noise analysis conducted for the project area, the loss of trees
due to this project will have a negligible effect on the amount of noise or quality of the air within
the project area.
Comment 23H: Concerned that the improved road elevations and curves will promote higher
speeds and greater traffic.
Response: The project is not proposing to raise the posted speed limit on this roadway. The
proposed design speed is 40mph.
Comment 23I: Concerned with the lack of consideration of decreased property values due to
increased noise and traffic.
Response: The project involves the improvement and long term maintenance of a trunk highway
that is being turned back to County jurisdiction as a minor arterial roadway. Property values
currently reflect that TH 101 is a Trunk Highway with high traffic volumes. The proposed
improvements do not change the functionality of the roadway.
Comment 23J: Concerned with lack of public communication to residents and request
additional input be requested from residents.
Response: The City will hold additional open house meetings for this project as it moves into
final design. It will also meet with affected property owners to discuss impacts, assessments and
compensation.
Page 18 of the EA/EAW documents the public involvement activities held to date. To date, the
City has held two open house meetings and a public hearing, has posted project information on its
website, has distributed project information via two project newsletters, and has held some
individual property owner meetings.
24. William Heinlien
Comment 24A: The commentor notes that he is in favor of the project; one life is worth more
than all the trees.
Response: Comment noted.
25. Leslie O'Halloran
Comment 25 A: Concerned with the use of new right of way for storm ponds and suggests using
existing surface water areas.
Response: State and federal laws prohibit the discharge of storm water runoff into wetlands and
other surface waters without prior treatment. Preliminary plans indicate the current size and
locations needed to meet local storm water treatment requirements. These ponds will be refined
as final plans are developed and further discussions occur with the Riley Purgatory Creek
Watershed District regarding alternative storm water treatment options.
26. Tammy Gorsuch
Comment 26A: Commentor requests additional alternatives to be considered.
Response: See response to Comment 8A.
27. Dan Horsfall
Comment 27A: Commentor requests additional alternatives to be considered.
Response: See response to Comment 8A.
Comment 27B: Why is a bike path needed on both sides of the roadway?
Findings of Fact and Conclusions TH 101 (CSAH 18 to CSAH 14)
November 2011 SP 194-010-011 B -5
Response: See response to Comment 5B.
Comment 27C: Can the project be constructed in phases to delay the larger impacts until the
southern leg south of Pioneer Trail is ready for improvements?
Response: The most significant project impacts are due to the realignment of the roadway to
address the existing horizontal and vertical alignment deficiencies and the construction of the
three stormwater ponds, improvements that are required to meet the project Purpose and Need.
Building a two or three lane section now with expansion to a four lane section at a later date
would not significantly change the impacts, and the future expansion of the roadway at a later
date would be much more costly than building the four lane section initially.
28. Thomas and Cheryl Jessen
Comment 28A: Suggests that the parallel roadway of Powers Boulevard can adequately provide
the capacity needed without the proposed improvements to TH 101.
Response: Traffic analysis has shown that both Powers Boulevard and TH 101 need to be four
lane sections to meet the future projected traffic volumes in the area.
Comment 28B: Why is a bike path needed on both sides of the roadway?
Response: See response to Comment 5B.
29. Rose and Roger Novotny
Comment 29A: Could a two-lane highway with turn lanes and a single bike path meet the
project goals?
Response: See response to Comments 5B and 8A/B.
Comment 2913: Why must we lose so many trees?
Response: See response to Comment 20A.
Comment 29C: Concerned with noise level increases and what can be done about it.
Response: See response to Comment 23G.
Comment 29D: Concerned with increased air pollution and what will be done about it.
Response: See response to Comment 23G.
Comment 29E: Will the speed limit be increased as a result of the project?
Response: See response to Comment 23H.
Comment 29F: How will the project effect property values?
Response: See response to Comment 23I.
30. Duke Zurek, Lake Riley Woods HOA
Comment 30A: More than 1,000, trees will be lost.
Response: See response to Comment 20A.
Comment 3013: Noise levels will double, even though within standards will impact the
neighborhood.
Response: See response to Comment 23G.
Comment 30C: New holding pond will take half of a parcel in the neighborhood.
Response: See response to Comment 25A.
Findings of Fact and Conclusions TH 101 (CSAH 18 to CSAH 14)
November 2011 SP 194-010-011 B -6
Comment 30D: Several neighbors will lose land for right of way.
Response: The proposed improvements to straighten curves and flatten elevations require new
right of way. The City will work with landowners to minimize permanent and temporary impacts
to parcels.
Comment 30E: Suggest keeping a two-lane road and allow other roadways to provide the
needed capacity and eliminate one bike path in effort to avoid trees.
Response: See response to Comment 29A.
31. Gayle and Lois Degler
Comment 31 A: The elevation of the intersection should not be raised as it will result in
increased noise and visibility to their property. Suggests cut down the hill to the south instead.
Response: Various options have been evaluated during the preliminary design process regarding
the Pioneer Trail intersection. An increase in elevation of up to seven feet was considered at the
intersection to prepare for future TH 101 improvements south of Pioneer Trail. The proposed
design includes an increase in elevation of approximately three feet to balance current impacts
with the need to provide for the future improvements.
Comment 3113: The commentor notes that they have drain tile that could be affected by the
intersection modifications proposed.
Response: The City will work with the property owners to determine the location and elevation
of the drain tile and to relocate or avoid it during construction.
32. Rob Fugile
Comment 32A: The four -lane will end at Pioneer Trail with no certain action on the south
segment.
Response: The roadway is being designed to meet the needs of future traffic volumes in the area
and to accommodate future roadway improvements south of Pioneer Trail. The proposed
improvements are necessary to address existing safety and capacity deficiencies regardless of
what happens in the future south of Pioneer Trail.
Comment 3213: The new bike path and tunnel provide no new utility — the existing trail is under
used.
Response: See response to Comment 5B.
Comment 32C: Where will new development occur that will be generating the increase in
traffic?
Response: The increase in traffic is the result of general growth in the surrounding area as
predicted by the Carver County Travel Demand Model.
Comment 321): The project includes the extension of the trunk water main.
Response: Yes, the utility improvements that can be made at the same time as the road
improvements have been incorporated into the plan in order to be cost effective rather than
having to remove the road surface at a future date to make the utility upgrades.
Comment 32E: Suggests that the proposed Highway 41 river crossing will reduced the need for
TH 101 improvements.
Response: The proposed improvements to TH 101 are necessary to address existing safety and
capacity deficiencies regardless of what happens with a new Highway 41 river crossing. The
proposed new Highway 41 river crossing is not in MnDOT's 30 year construction plan.
Findings of Fact and Conclusions TH 101 (CSAH 18 to CSAH 14)
November 2011 SP 194-010-011 B -7
33.
34.
Comment 32F: Agrees with need for improving grade, sight lines and turn lanes.
Response: Comment noted.
Randy and Cheryl Thiele
Comment 33A: Suggests that a path on both sides of the roadway is unnecessary.
Response: See response to Comment 5B.
Comment 33B: Suggests that tree replacement is more important than the grade changes
proposed, and that Powers Boulevard can provide the capacity needed for trucks and fast traffic.
Response: See response to Comment 28A.
Paul Paulson
Comment 34A: Please attempt to reduce the number of trees to be removed, especially the large
oaks.
Response: See response to Comment 20A.
Comment 34B: Consider realigning the Paulson and Blanski driveways with the Wilson Nursery
driveway or regrading the proposed alignment due to steep grades and safety concerns in winter.
Response: The City will work with the property owners during the final design process to
address the driveway concerns. The City prefers an option that includes the realignment of the
driveways to connect to the Wilson Nursery driveway.
Comment 34C: Please find an alternate to removing the trees on the east side of the Blanski
property as it will open sight lines to the park and roadway.
Response: The City will work individually with property owners to minimize tree loss and
relocate and/or replace trees where possible. The design team is reviewing options to shift or
realign the pedestrian underpass to decrease tree impacts.
35. Kathy Horsfall
Comment 35A: The project design seems over built. Why are 5-lanes needed now?
Response: See response to Comment 8A and 8B.
Comment 35B: The EA does not mention the loss of trees, the impact of storm water ponds, and
the measurement of noise impact is weak.
Response: The noise evaluation followed standard state and federal guidelines for
measuring/modeling existing and projected noise impacts. The results indicate an increase in
noise, however, that increase was below federal thresholds for noise impact. The noise results are
shown in Tables 4 and 5 of the Noise Technical report and have been included in Appendix F of
this document.
Comment 35C: The EA/EAW should discuss compensating landowners for loss of trees and
property value, provide mitigation for visual and noise pollution, and provide replacement tree
plantings.
Response: The City will coordinate with individual property owners regarding impacts to trees
and land. The City will work with landowners to relocate trees or replace them to the extent
possible from the new right of way to their respective properties. Noise mitigation is not required
for this project, however the City will work with landowners to provide buffering and screening
as possible.
Findings of Fact and Conclusions TH 101 (CSAH 18 to CSAH 14)
November 2011 SP 194-010-011 B -8
36. James Wiese
Comment 36A: A four -lane road with walking paths on both sides would be overwhelming to
the area.
Response: See response to Comments 5B, 8A, and 8B.
Comment 36B: If a two-lane road does not fit your goals, then I would support no road
improvements.
Response: Comment noted.
37. David Gatto
Comment 37A: Suggests that a two-lane road with turn lanes at 96`h Street and Kiowa Lane and
no additional bike lane would adequately handle current traffic.
Response: See response to Comment 5B, 8A, and 8B.
Comment 37B: Suggests straightening the road to cross through the wetland area between
Kiowa and 96`h and displace residents on the west side of the roadway as needed.
Response: Wetlands regulations require that impacts to wetlands be minimized. Project costs
would increase significantly to cross through the wetland and take several properties. This is not
a realistic alternative based on costs and regulatory requirements.
Comment 37C: Use natural boulder walls rather than concrete.
Response: Comment noted.
Comment 37D: Design the roadway appropriately to avoid heaving in the winter.
Response: Comment noted.
38. David Blanski
Comment 38A: Where are the blind trail crossings referenced on pages 5 and 6?
Response: The project need stated on page 5 of the EA was intended to reference the absence of
existing pedestrian crossings in the corridor (except at Pioneer Trail). Pedestrians that wish to
cross to/from the west side of TH 101 to the trail on the east side of TH 101 have poor sight
distance due to the curves and elevation changes of the road for a safe crossing.
Comment 38B: The AADT traffic counts from 2008 do not reflect the reduction in volumes
experienced since the opening of TH 212.
Response: The future traffic forecast volumes that are the basis for the recommended
improvements do include US 212 as a four -lane freeway in the project area.
Comment 38C: Concerned with right in/right out driveway entrance and steep slope of driveway
if constructed as designed.
Response: The City will work together with the three property owners at this location to try to
develop an agreeable solution to property access modifications.
Comment 38D: Has the crash data been updated to reflect recent improvements at Pioneer
Trail?
Response: The crash data is historic data based on the existing conditions at the time of the
accidents.
Comment 38E: What study has been done to justify a pedestrian tunnel at the park?
Response: The pedestrian tunnel is being proposed to provide a grade separated access to
Bandimere Park from the west side of TH 101 and a future regional trail extension west of TH
Findings of Fact and Conclusions TH 101 (CSAH 18 to CSAH 14)
November 2011 SP 194-010-011 B -9
101. The tunnel will provide a safer trail crossing rather than an at -grade crossing considering the
projected traffic volumes along TH 101 and the arterial function of the roadway. The trail
underpass is included in the Carver County 2030 Comprehensive Plan, and the City's 2030 Parks
Comprehensive plan and has been studied by the City's Park Commission.
Comment 38F: Concerned with noise increase and the carbon exchange lost with the loss of
vegetation.
Response: See response to Comments 23G, 29C, and 29D.
Comment 38G: Notes a discrepancy in the document regarding steep slopes.
Response: See response to Comment 5E.
39. Darcy Loffler
Comment 39A: Urges City to consider a design that has less impact on the character of the
neighborhood.
Response: Comment noted. See response to Comments 5A, 8a, and 8B.
40. Dave Wondra
Comment 40A: More than 1,000, trees will be lost.
Response: See response to Comment 20A.
Comment 40B: Noise levels will double, even though within standards will impact the
neighborhood.
Response: See response to Comment 23G.
Comment 40C: Suggests other roadways to provide the needed capacity.
Response: See response to Comment 28A.
Comment 40D: New holding pond will take half of a parcel in the neighborhood.
Response: See response to Comments 23E and 30C.
Comment 40E: Several neighbors will lose land for right of way.
Response: See response to Comment 301).
Comment 40F: Notes that he will lose nearly half an acre of prairie that has been a 19 year
restoration project. Even though it would only be for a construction easement, the loss of the
prairie would need to be compensated.
Response: The City will work with the property owner to either restore the prairie or provide
compensation for the prairie impacts.
Comment 40G: City requires tree replacement for development projects but not for public
infrastructure projects.
Response: See response to Comment 20A.
Comment 40H: Supports a two-lane road with one bike path to reduce tree impacts and preserve
the character of the community.
Response: See response to Comment 29A.
Comment 40I: Suggests the road is over engineered but welcomes the improvements for safety
from the proposed grade changes.
Response: Comment noted.
Findings of Fact and Conclusions TH 101 (CSAH 18 to CSAH 14)
November 2011 SP 194-010-011 B -10
41. Terri Byrne
Comment 41A: Notes that most people on 96t" Street did not receive notice of the public
hearing.
Response: The City placed a notice of the public hearing in the local paper as required by law
and mailed notices to those properties directly abutting TH 101.
Comment 41B: Wants changes made to the project based on comments made at the public
hearing.
Response: Comment noted.
Comment 41C: The existing condition at 9601 and TH 101 is terrible because of the hill and
curve. Questions why Kiowa to Springfield is not included as part of the project, this street was
not meant to be a cul de sac.
Response: The blind curve and elevation of the 96/TH 101 intersection is one of the current
deficiencies the project is being designed to correct.
Comment 41D: Notes that a trail on the west side of TH 101 is definitely needed.
Response: Comment noted.
42. Sharon Gatto
Comment 42A: Commentor notes a change from County 101 to State Highway 101 and asks the
reason for the change.
Response: MnDOT is turning state jurisdiction back to Carver County. As part of the state
turnback program, MnDOT provides funding to upgrade the roadway to current standards. The
majority of the project funding is coming from federal State Transportation Improvement
Program funds.
Comment 42B: Suggests that Powers Boulevard provides adequate roadway capacity for the
area.
Response: See response to Comment 28A.
Comment 42C: Suggest a three lane roadway would be adequate to improve the roadway.
Response: See response to Comment 8B.
Comment 42D: The five lane roadway will increase traffic and traffic noise.
Response: See response to Comment 8B and 23G.
Comment 42E: Concerned the road improvements will result in a speed increase on TH 101.
Response: The road improvements will result in a safer roadway. The design speed of the
roadway is 40 mph.
43. Roselee Wondra
Comment 43A: Agrees with need for safety improvements.
Response: Comment noted.
Comment 43B: Questions the need for capacity improvements on this segment of TH 101.
Concerned improvements will increase traffic traveling south.
Response: The roadway is being designed to meet the needs of projected future traffic volumes
in the area.
Findings of Fact and Conclusions TH 101 (CSAH 18 to CSAH 14)
November 2011 SP 194-010-011 B -11
Comment 43C: The noise increase from this project is not acceptable to those that live here.
Also concerned with the loss of prairie and trees in the project area. The plan needs to address
compensation and replacement for these impacts
Response: See response to Comments 20A , 23C, 23G, and 40F.
Comment 43D: Urges City to consider another option.
Response: See response to Comment 8A.
Findings of Fact and Conclusions TH 101 (CSAH 18 to CSAH 14)
November 2011 SP 194-010-011 B -12
APPENDIX C
TRANSCRIPT AND PUBLIC NOTICE INFORMATION
Findings of Fact and Conclusions TH 101 (CSAH 18 to CSAH 14)
November 2011 SP 194-010-011
Chanhassen City Council fugust 8, 2011 •
Mayor Furlong: Any questions? Welcome Corporal. We appreciate it and look forward to your
service.
Cpl. John Bramwell: Great, thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Any questions for the Lieutenant fftis evening on the statistic report or anything
else?
Todd Gerhardt: Could you give a little bit of am update on the Tour of the Tonka race, or ride
that went through Chanhassen,
U Jeff Enevold: Well yeah, we had the Tour de Tonka race which was Saturday. It went off
without a hitch. No problems. It was a great event for the community and we coordinated it
well and there was no issues to it
Todd Gerhardt: No feedback or traffic; delays or anything like that?
Lt. Jeff Enevold: I haven't heard anything, no.
Todd Gerhardt: Okay, great.
Lt. Jeff Enevold: Very good Mr. Mayor, council. Thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you Lieutenant. We also would receive normally a monthly update from
The Chanhassen Fire Department this evening. One of the items in our consent agenda was to
approve the appointment of John Wolffas the new fire chief. He's unable to be here tonight We
do have a report in our packet so I would ask if any members of the council have questions
regarding that report, we can direct them to Mr. Gerhardt and either he'll have the answer or he
can get it. So looks like we have a full compliment of firefighters on the staff and with anew
chief I'm sure well hear from Chief Wolff now probably as part of the budget discussions
coming up in the next few weeks as well as at future meetings. Anything else Mr. Gerhardt?
Todd Gerhardt: Fire department participated in the National Night Out. They did a great job.
We appreciate them taking that time, along with all our department heads ibis year got out to
meet the public also. What a great event. It's key to have neighbors watching out for neighbors
and what a great event and they do a fantastic job. I had a rootbeer float that was great so.
Mayor Furlong: Very good, thank you. Let's move on to the next item on our agenda.
PUBLIC HEARING: TH 101 IMPROVIWNTS, LYMAN BOULEVARD TO PIONEER
TRAIL, EALRAW PUBLIC HEARING, C1TY PROJECT020RAL
Public Present -
Name Address
3
Chanhassen City Council - August 8, 2011
stephanic & Jamie Heilicher
Doug & Becky Duchon
Bev & Jack Bell
Dan & Kathy Horsf ill
Tim Erhart
Mike Domke
Hallie Bershow
David Blanski
Paul Paulson
Karl & Mark Nettesheim
Dave Wondra
Carol Dunsrnore
Leslie O'Halloran
Bob Hack
Rose Novotny
Sharon Gatto
Roselee Wondra
Bill Munig
9290 Kiowa Trail
9630 Foxford Road
9371 Kiowa Trail
9610 Foxford Road
9611 Meadowlark Cane
9361 Kiowa Trail
9271 Kiowa Trail
9350 Great Plains Boulevard
9250 Great Plains Boulevard
9201 and 9131 Great Plains Boulevard
9590 Foxford Road
730 West 9e Street
710 West 96' Street
770 Pioneer Trail
560 Pineview Court
9631 Foxford Road
9590 Foxford Road
6850 Stratford Boulevard
Mayor Furlong: The purpose tonight is for the council to receive comments, is that correct?
Paul Oehme: That's correct.
Mayor Furlong: There will be no action taken this evening, is that correct?
Paul Oehme: That's correct. Just hold the public hearing.
Mayor Furlong: Great. Let's start with the staff report please and background on the project and
other information, Mr. Oehme.
Paul Oehme: Sure, we have a power point presentation dratted for you tonight for your review
and the public too but again staff would like to hold a public hearing for basically the
environmental aspect issues surrounding the 101 project. Staff has been working on this project
for almost 9 years, or 9 months now and this is kind of the culmination of the project_ What
you're going to see tonight is basically the preliminary layout of the project. Final design is not
anticipated to start until the end of the year or maybe even next year if the project moves forward
so with that I'd like to have Jon Horn with Kimley-Horn and Associates give a brief presentation
on the project and then also Beth Kunkel, the environmental person with Kimley-Hom to update
us on their findings so.
Jon Hom: Good evening Mayor, members of the City Council. As Mr. Oehme mentioned my
name is Jon Horn. I'm with Kimley-Horn and Associates. I'm the project manager that's been
working with city staff as well as MnDOT and Carver County to lead some of your design
efforts for the 101 project. A brief presentation we wanted to run through tonight, again as Mr.
Oehme stated the purpose for the meeting tonight is a public heating specifically related to the
environmental document, enviromnental assessment, environmental assessment worksheet or
4
Chanbassen City Council tgust 8, 2011
EA/EAW that's been prepared for the project. Power point that we have tonight gives you a
little project background on the project I'll turn it over to Beth Kunkel from my office who will
go through the specifics of the environmental review document and will walk you through kind
of the next steps in how the process goes from here on out. Project background, this section is a
section of 101 between Lyman Boulevard on the north and Pioneer Trail on the south. Currently
today it's a two lane undivided rural section roadway. No curb and gutter. A lot of very steep
grades. Sharp curves. A number of sight distance issues along the corridor all leading to crash
rates that are higher than similar roadways of this nature. More than 50% higher along this
specific segment of 101 and similar two lane roadways around the metro area. So the purpose of
this project is to improve traffic safety, capacity and connectivity issues on 101, again
specifically between Lyman Boulevard and Pioncer Trail. Some of the goals for the project.
Need to address those safety deficiencies to reduce the orashes. Add turn lanes at the
intersection to provide for safer intersection movements. Improve sight distance. We're taking
some of those sharp curves out and dips and drops in the alignment of tho roadway. Also
working to improve capacity. As the area grows additional traffic volumes are on this piece of
roadway. The goal is to provide for those traffic volumes. And then while we're doing that you
really need to look for ways to minimize environmental impacts associated with the
improvements so as we've gone through the process and as Beth will talk about here in a minute
in the environmental document we've been looking for ways to avoid and minimize or mitigate
those environmental documents. And then also the project will require the acquisition of some
right-of-way so we're looking for ways to try to minimize those right-of-way takings as well.
Want to talk a little bit about the public and agency involvement process. This has really been a
partnership between Chanhassen, Carver County and MnDOT. We've had a project
management team or PMT that we've been working with here since last November I think was
our first meeting and generally monthly meetings to talk about the project and to try to come up
with design solutions. We've also tried to get the public involved in the process. We've got a
couple of printed newsletters that have gone out. One back in November of 2010 and then one In
June of 2011 followed up by some open house meetings. Generally I think we got 15 to 20
people in attendance at both of those open house meetings with &a primary purpose of just
informing people about the project and really trying to understand what some of the concerns
are. We did have some properties along the corridor that we wanted to talk to and we did not get
representation at the public meetings. We've had a lbw, a handfal of on site individual property
owner meetings just to again reach out to the people In the corridor and try to understand what
the concerns are. And we have utilized the City's website as a mechanism to try to share
information to the public as well, so we've been trying to do our best to try to get information out
and get comments as much as possible. Tonight is really the next step in tams of understanding
what those comments and concerns are from the people in the project area Some of the things
we've heard to date, there's some pretty majestic trees and a lot of trees in the corridor, so what
can we do to try to minimize impact to those. A number ofpeople have expressed concern about
sight distances and what can we do to improve some of those intersections. Suffering, screening.
Is there some way, since we are widening the roadway, the roadway in some locations is getting
closer to properties. Is there some things we can do to provide some buffering, screening,
banning of those properties? And then construction phasing, staging. How's that going to work
and how do we minimize impacts to properties during the construction process. In terms of
project schedule, Mr. Oehme touched on this briefly but we're really looking to try to get the
preliminary design process aid the environmental process done here in 2011 with the goal of
Chanhassen City Council - August 8, 2011
moving forward with the final design in late 2011 or early 2012. Right-of-way acquisition
process would be in 2012 and then construction the majority which would occur in 2013.
Possibly some in 2014 or maybe very late 2012. We're still working through the details on that.
On the environmental document, like I said Beth's going to go through the details on this but the
purpose of the environmental document is to look at all the environmental issues along the
corridor and then to look at the preferred design alternative and understand what the impacts on
those environmental entities are as a part of the design process, and as I said Beth will go
through the details on that. Environmental document looks at two alternatives. The first
alternative, do nothing. Basically leave the roadway the way it is today. And then the preferred
alterative which sees the two lane undivided roadway go to a four lane divided roadway with a
center median that adds 10 foot wide pedestrian trails along both sides of the roadway. Would
have curb and gutter as we go from a Waal section of roadway to an urban section roadway so
curb and gutter, storm sewer and were proposing 3 stormwater ponds. It's also proposing for a
pedestrian safety perspective a tunnel under 101 generally in the vicinity of Bandimere Park to
provide for that pedestrian movement east to west without having an at grade crossing of the
roadway. So a very big picture perspective. This shows the proposed design. On the left hand
side ofthis exhibit is Pioneer Trail. On the right hand side is Lyman Boulevard Yon cansee
we're stopping just short of Lyman Boulevard on the north end. Basically tying into the segment
of 101 that was built as a part ofthe Trunk Highway 212 project here recently. So that's the
project and kind of narrowed it down ma little more detail. I just want to go through some
specifies moving along the corridor from south to north so this is a blow-up of the southerly most
part of the corridor right at Pioneer Trail. Shows that we are doing some construction on Pioneer
Trail cast and west of 101 as well as south on 101. That intersection today, there's actually a
pretty steep grade across Pioneer Trail. The purpose of these improvements is to get rid of that
steep grade. Flatten it out Also to help prepare 101 for the future extension to the south at some
day when that would occur Really trying to plan ahead and look at the design for what 101 may
be south of Pioneer Trail at a future date. Again moving to the north, I'm not in the vicinity of
96fd Street. A number of comments from residents along 9e Street about sight distance
challenges at that intersection so we've been working to try to figure out the best design for that.
It also shows a couple of stormwater ponds, and I don't know i£Paul you can maybe highlight
those?
Paul Oehme: Sure.
Jon Hom: One along the west side of 101, north of 96a` Street as well as one on the south side of
960' Street on the east side of the roadway. Those ponds will be the purpose of detaining stone
water. Reducing runoff to it's current rates as well as treatment for that storm water prior to
discharge in some of the wetlands in the arcs. Another comment I guess in this particular area, a
number of concerns from property owners along the east side of the roadway in terms of the
proximity of the roadway to the backs of their properties and the concern for screening. Is there
some ability to do some berating, buffering, landscaping in this area? Things that well be
looking for, looking at closely as the project moves forward so how best to provide some of that
berating and buffering through that area. Moving to the north, the third stormwater pond, as I
mentioned the three, is actually at that location which is kind of tucked in between a couple of
wetlands. That again is on the west side of 101 and now we're getting closer to the vicinity of
Bandimere Park. The existing fields for Bandimere Park just to the east side of the corridor. A
Chanhassen City Council ?ugust 8, 2011
lot of effort through the design process to try to minimize or eliminate any impacts to the active
parts of the park. We do have a retaining wall that's proposed to be constructed, as Paul points
out there along the cast side of the roadway to help minimize those impacts to Bandimere Park.
And then moving to the north, you were approaching the Lyman Boulevard. A significant part
of the project is the realignment of the access to Bandimore Park A lot of concems about that
access and safety issues and sight distance issues there. This basically shows the sliding of that
access driveway further to the north, aligned generally with the Willson's Landscaping access on
the west side of the roadway. Re configuration of the access back around It actually required
the acquisition of a parcel of property of a residence actually at that location to allow that to
occur. The underpass, following the cursor around at that location and that's one that provides
that pedestrian connection across 101 without an at grade crossing. Some concerns about that in
particular, the west side of that underpass crossing, there's a number of trece in that location and
the possibility of reconfiguring that design to try to minimize tree impacts and again as the
project moves forward that's a concern that we would look at further as we go through the
process. With that well go through the details of the environmental document
Beth Kunkel: As Jon pointed out we've completed an BA and an EAW, combined document for
the project Because the project has federally, federal funds intended to be used we have to
follow the federal process as well as the state process. This list of impacts or issue areas is the
list that is addressed in both the state and due federal environmental review process. So each of
these areas are covered in that document The areas highlighted in red are the ones that we've
identified potential impacts as a result of the project, as well as potential mitigation measures that
would minimize those impacts so P11 run through each of those. We'll start with the water
resources and wetlands. As Jon mentioned there are a number of wetlands along the corridor.
Two of those wetlands are DNR protected waters, which nieans the DNR has jurisdiction over
these and has permitting authority for any fill or activity within those wetlands. The other
wetlands as well as these, the Army Corps of Engineers has jurisdiction over and require separate
permits as well through their process. The amount of impact we try to minimize as part of the
preliminary design process by narrowing the roadway through those major wetland areas to
minimize the amount of fill within those wetlands The amount of fill for the overall project is
2.2 acres. To put that in perspective the total right-of-way area through the corridor is roughly
29 acres. The roadway portion of the project alone has about 1 A acres of imnact The trail
adjacent to the roadway on both sides would roughly end up with about 7110 's of an acre of
wetland impact. The replacement plan for those wetland impacts has not been nailed down yet
That will be part of the permit process through both the City and the Army Corps and the DNR
but the replacement ratios are set via State statutes and Federal law which is basically a 2 to 1
replacement ratio if you're replacing on site or within the city or 2 Y, to I ration if you're outside
of basically the general wetland bank service area. So were anticipating potentially the State
providing replacement for the roadways as it is eligible for safety improvements for the City to
pick up the cost and the credits for the wetland. Impacts due to the roadway. The trail impacts
would likely be picked up, or the mitigation prepared or eroded by the City. Another impact
area, erosion control and sedimentation. This is a issue when areas am graded and you expose
the soil so tmvegetated areas, again the total right-of-way area is about 29 acres. We don't
anticipate the full roadway being exposed at the same time so there would be a mitigation plan
through a stormwater permit and a stormwater pollution prevention plan put in place. Erosion
control measures to minimize the impacts during construction. As a result of the additional
Chanhassen City Council - august 8, 2011
travel lanes, two additional lanes oftrafFtc, one in each direction being added to the roadway as
well as the impervious surface for the construction of the trail will result in an additional roughly
7 acres of new impervious surface to the area which will need to be treated for stormwater runoff
as well as water quality. As Jon pointed out there are 3 stormwater ponds being constructed as
part of the project that would meet that legal requirement through that permitting process to
provide that storage and treatment requirement through that NPDES permit process. Noise I'm
sure is a very top concern of the neighbors in this area so we looked at a noise analysis of what
the change in the roadway would change as far as noise levels along the roadway corridor. We
looked at 29 receptor sites which essentially included all the residents directly adjacent to the
roadway as well as some along 9e. There's actually a. graphic here that shows the receptor
locations. Each of those dots was one of the receptors identified during the, or for the noise
study. These were plugged into a model to determine how that noise would carry from the
reconfigured road as well as the widened road section. There's a couple of tables here which you
may not be able to read up close but they are included in the noise report which I believe is
linked to the website that you can take a look at in more detail but the conclusion is basically 70
decibels is the federal threshold for noise. Most of the existing homes under existing conditions
have a threshold less than 50. The increase due to the road project is less than a, in most cases
less than a 5 decibel difference which is well under that 70 decibel limit. This basically says that
the future noise levels will not exceed that federal threshold. Obviously that doesn't mean that
there is no noise in the corridor or there isn't a change in noise but it's under that threshold and
therefore under federal requirements no specific noise wall or other abatement requirements are
required Ion pointed out than there will be some impacts to Bandimere Park. Again we've
minimized to the extent possible through the use of retaining walls in the preliminary design to
minimize the impact. The highest priority in looking at the impacts here was to not result in any
change in the ballfield areas. The active uses within the park because those are harder to
mitigate and replace someplace else. The impact areas are primarily open space, steep slopes
that will be minimized through putting retaining walls along the inside of that curve. One of the
things requited due to the federal process is under the Section 4F requirements, that any parkland
that is impacted must be- replaced at a I to 1 ratio. The City has in it's long term plan to add to
the park two parcels, Paull you might want to point out those two parcels on the north side, that
are in the long term plan to be added to the park. Part of this project would actually add one of
those parcels which is needed to try to provide the access realignment as well as part of the
mitigation replacement for the area in blue along the west side of the park that will be impacted
by the project. So that's the impact area and then the replacement area would be the new parcel
on the north side. Obviously with widening the roadway there's additional right-of-way that's
going to be needed for the project Roughly 7 acres of new permanent right-of-way will be
required in various strips along each side of the corridor. That affects 10 separate parcels.
Drainage easements due to the need for stormwater ponds and some of the dminageways also is
required. Another roughly 5 acres affecting 3 separate parcels. And then temporary consuuetiom
easements during construction to get in the retaining walls and some of the other grading
activities. Another 3 % acres affecting I parcels, and then the one full total of parcel purchase
for the new parcel for the addition to the park. So that's a quick overview of the actual impacts
of the project ofthe various areas that are required to be evaluated through the State and Federal
process. The purpose of tonight's meeting is really to gain input from the public on the adequacy
and the completeness of the environmental documentation. The comment period for this
environmental document last is extends through August 24 ". I want to make sure everybody's
Chanhassen City Connell Ing= 8, 201l •
aware of the 20 date. I think there was a misprint in the EQB Monitor that said the 22nd but the
date is ends on a Wednesday which is August 24"The next step after the EAW comment
period closes is to prepare both the Federal and the State findings documents. The Findings of
Fact would be presented back to City Council for their approval of that document and the
findings and approval of the environmental document It's not an approval ofthe project as a
whole butjust that the document is complete. The Federal process is basically would be.
submitted to MnDOT and FHWA as a request for a finding of no significant impact and that
would be their official document and approval process and that also would come back to council.
The timeline for both of those will be to be completed this fail with an anticipated approval by
the end of the year. And that basically concludes our presentation. This then provides the
opportunity for people to provide their comments through the public hearing so ifthere are any
questions.
Mayor Furlong: Any questions at this point?
Councilman Laufenburger. I do have a question Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Furlong: Councilman Laufenburger.
Councilman Laufenburger Can you, is it Beth?
Beth Kunkel: Yes.
Councilman Ia» fenburger. Can you speak to the three stormwatet ponds? First of all is there
current ponding occurring in that area right now? And if not, why are you selecting those
particular sites and why not one larger stormwater pond? Just educate me a little bit on that if
you wouldn't mind.
Beth Kunkel: I will take first shot at it and Jon you want to add a few things from an engineering
standpoint but currently all three locations I believe are in upland areas. They're not currently
wetlands so there isn't wet or water in those locations. The one pond is located between two
wetlands. There's a little bit of an upland saddle on that location.
Councilman Laufenburger. Yep. That's right adjacent to Bandimere right? On the west side of
Bandimere Park?
Beth Kunkel: Yes, on the west side. The other one on the west side is also adjacent to the
existing wetland but it's on an upland location so we're not proposing any of these ponds within
wetland areas. And the one on the east side is in a low depressional area but it's not typically
saturated or has standing water. There is an existing storm pipe I believe in that location that
crosses the road at that location.
Councilman Laufenburger: Okay. So these are stormwater ponds that will be created
specifically for the purpose of allowing stormwater runoffto be temperature readied and
sediment.
Chanhassen city Council - August 8, 2011
Paul Oehme: Rate control and water quality issues before it ends up in the discharge wetlands or
in Lake Riley.
Councilman Laufenburger•. Okay. So the stormwater ponds are only temporary location for the
water until they naturally move to either the wetlands or across 101 to Lake Riley, am I saying
that correctly?
Paul Oehme: Correct. Yeah, I mean it's always our intent to treat the water. We have to treat
the water if it tuns off an impervious surface into water quality bodies. Stormwater ponds per se
before it ends up in wetlands or lakes or streams. Those type of things. Natural features.
Councilman Laufenburger: And you plan the size of these stormwater ponds to accommodate
100 year floods or something like that, is that correct?
Paul Oeimre: Correct Yeah each of the ponds are designed for overflow capabilities to, then
that we have a large rain event that cannot handle these type of ponds so there is overland flow
associated with each of those ponds and so it doesn't back up into structures basically.
Councilman Laufenburger Okay. Is part of the treatment also the introduction of barriers to
mosquito reproduction?
Paul Oehme: Not under this.
Councilman Laufenburgan Alright.
Mayor Furlong: That's what the helicopters.
Councilman Laufenburger: Yeah I was thinking are we going to see helicopters drop pellets into
these stormwater ponds.
Paul Oehme: We could.
Councilman Iaufcnburger: Okay. That answers my question. Thank you Beth.
Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, council members, just to add a comment to that, Currently 101 is what
we call a rural section road. There's no curb or gutter. There may be some isolated spots for
drainage purposes but this we would be introducing curb from basically just past Lyman all the
way down to Pioneer and that water will then go into the di#ianent manholes and then ultimately
into the ponds.
Councilman Laufenburgar: Okay.
Mayor Furlong: And this may be a question for Ms. Aamenson and Mr. Oehme both but are the
ponds being sized strictly for the roadway or are they being oversized for future development in
the area or will the ponds have, will future development require them to provide their own
portding?
Chanhassen City Council fugust 8, 2011 0
Paul Oehme: Future development in the area will have to require their own ponds, We don't,
we can't anticipate what type of those developments could occur in this area. We have looked
at, especially Pond 2 here for anticipated improvements to 96°i Street so future reconstruction
potentially of that street Most of that water potentially can be directed into this pond.
Mayor Furlong: And 9.e is currently a rural section?
Paul Oehme: I'm song, yeah 961i is a Waal section so we're anticipating that that pond will be
sized to accommodate those improvements along with Kiowa Trail as well. There is a portion of
Kiowa Trail that drains onto 101 right now. The design that were looking at it calls for making
those improvements to 101 to accommodate future improvements on Kiowa to take that drainage
and treat that water into this pond here if and when that project would take place.
Mayor furlong: So what I'm hearing is they're going to be sized in anticipation of future Dubuc
right-of-way street improvements that are currently rural and would be, would include those,
those local sheets would include curb and gutter.
Paul Oehme: That's correct
Mayor Furlong: But they're not going to be sized over that for any other private development.
Paul Oehme: Not any private development
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Other questions at this point? Just a quick question on, and maybe
this will come up and if we can pull up I& Oehme the Pioneer Tmil/I Of proposed intersection.
Ifs hard to see but it looks like there's plans, that includes a, for southbound traffic it includes a
left turn, a straight through and a right turn lane currently. Am I looking at it correctly that when
improvements are made south ofPioneer Trail there's room for right turn lanes so that we can
have two through lanes? Is that, am I lookin at it correctly?
Paul Oehme: That's correct. Right, yeah we're trying to set up the intersection at this time for
future improvements to the south where we don't have to get into the intersection grades per se
or move that signal system again to accommodate the improvements south on 101 so what we're
trying to do is anticipate what the future leg south of 101 would be so we don't have to make
improvements north of Pioneer Trail,
Mayor Furlong: That's why the trail kind of kicks out a little bit thereon the west side?
Paul Oehme: Yep.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Any other questions at this point of staff? Let me then do a
couple things. First of all well open up the public hearing. To the extent there are questions
raised I would ask that staff and representatives from Kimley-Horn try to respond to them as they
can. I think too Ms. Hokkanen do we have a tablet of paper over on the table there? If we can
get that passed out so if everybody that's making comments here can sign up so we make sure,
Chanhassen City Council - August 8, 2011
do we have a pen? Is there one going around already? I don't know sometimes it's on that table
over there. Is it? If somebody could just grab it and make sore that gets around the room please.
If you haven't signed up as being herein attendance we'd appreciate if you'd sign up. And we
have on the table up here, Ms. Aanenson we have the aerial view of the project so people can
point to their property or the issue and such like that. Let's go ahead and open up the public
hearing then and invite interested parties to come forward and ask questions or address the
council on matters of interest. Thank you. Good evening sir. Ifyou could state your name and
address for the record as well, we'd appreciate it.
Dave Wondre: My name's Dave Wondra and I live at 9590 Foxford Road and want to comment
on three subjects. The first, the additional right-of-way and temporary casement that affects our
property. Then tree removal and then berming is the third thing. If you could, for the sake of us.
Kate Aancuson: We're not getting this camera to work_
Dave Woodra: Okay. You want me to.
Paul Oehme: Why don't we just use the power point
Mayor Furlong: That's fine. Sometimes ifs just helpful for us to understand where your
property is, I'm sorry to interrupt Okay.
Dave Wondra: Good to go? Okay. Well we've worked really hard to take good care of our land
and from the start we wanted to be, use a real sustainable environmentally friendly approach so
what we did is we installed prairie and we did it 19 years ago and we have about 2 acres of
prairie on our property and then 2 of our neighbors also joined in and so we have about 5 acres
that goes across all of our combined properties and it took substantial investment in terms of
effort and funding over a lot of years to get it established and up and going and our efforts have
paid off. Our prairie's an early example of how to successfully incorporate prairie restoration to
the landscape: it's been photographed by Nature Conservancy. Featured in two books on native
landscaping. Been in numerous newspaper, magazine articles and the U of M stops out from
time to time to do research on how it's coming along. Due to this project approximately 25% of
the prairie will be destroyed and it's because of the, mostly because of the temporary easement
And while the easement is temporary, the impact has a very long term effect It will take many
years and a substantial investment of both time and money to essentially restore the restoration.
So I know the City supports prairie restoration and appreciates the environmental benefit of this
approach to landscaping and my request is that the City consider other approaches to still do
what's needed for temporary easement, that we find a way that that doesn't take the prairie out.
Second subject, trees. Judging by the plans we've seen, there's literally hundreds of trees that
will be removed from our neighborhood. In our case there are over 100 trees on our property
alone, and besides the natural beauty they also serve as a visual screen for us against 101. It's
our understanding that the City will be replacing some number of trees and we look forward to
learning how many, what kind and what size. And the last is on the betming. Due to changes in
elevation along the proposed road, and anticipated increases in traffic, there will be substantially
more noise generated by the highway and while I appreciate that the study says that noise will be
under acceptable levels, that's the same of saying, same thing as saying it's okay to raise
Chanhassen City Council august 8, 2011 0
pollution up to legal levels, Right now it's relatively quiet In our neighborhood. This wall no
doubt unequivocally raise noise so while we appreciate that It's legal, it will have a substantial
change and have substantial significant impact to us. In talking with Paul he said the City is
open to discussing a berm through that area and our request is that we have an agreement on
banning prior to the project being bid so that we have some assurance that, that noise will be an
acceptable level. Thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Do you want to address any of those items as we move along here
or?
Paul Oehme: Sure. Just.
Mayor Furlong: And can we get up the power point at least so we can see about where along the
corridor his property Is located.
Paul Ochmo: The Wondra's property I believe is right here.
Mayor Furlong: Is that correct?
Dave Wondra: Yep.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you.
Paul Oehme: So the specifically with respect to the berm that he had talked about, the City staff
is open to evaluating and looking at potential construction of a bean to alleviate some of the
potential noise impacts and headlight issues that potentially can tape place, especially on the
curved portion of 101 so we're looking at address, crying to address that upfront. I think the time
to start talking about that and working through that process is when the right-of-way acquisitions
are necessary and trying to incorporate that into the temporary easements that would potentially
be needed for the, for those improvements to take place. In terms of the prairie issue, that's kind
of a new one to me. That's the first Cve heard ofthat. There is you know prairie restoration
contractors that we can talk to to try to either restore what the impacts are out tbere, or you know
try to, I mean we can talk to our contractor who's out there to try to mitigate as much of the
impacts as possible when the construction's taking place so I think we can work with the
property owners in trying to address both of those issues. in terms of tree replacement, you
know we have been talking to MnDOT and Carver County about doing some sort o£t=
replacement package with this project. Our anticipation is to have somewhat of a reforestation
component to the project At this time we do not have a plan at this time. That typically conks
through in the final design stage of the process so that's our goal That's the, what we're trying
to work towards.
Mayor Furlong: Couple questions that come to mind. I know having driven this corridor in
terms of topography, you know there's a hill there and 96s' you come down below around.
We're going to be, as a part of this project it will be seeking to level and straighten the road
Paul Oehme: Yep.
13
Chanhassen City Council - August 8, 2011
Mayor Furlong: As a part of that.
Paul Oehme: Absolutely.
Mayor Furlong: Where is the alignment of the road going to be relative to the homes on the east
side? Is it going to be above? Below? About the same?
Paul Oehruc: On the east side. Jon can you help me.
Mayor Furlong: Maybe it's a question of topography there as we're looking at.
Paul Oehme: It kind of moves around in this area so.
Mayor Furlong: night. Okay. And maybe that's the answer.
Jon Isom: Some it will, some it won't.
Paul Oahme: Yeah its kind of, this area it's high at the intersection of 96ih Street and then it
kind of comes down.
Mayor Furlong: As you go north?
Paul Oehme: As you go north there so in terms of where it's higher than the property, existing
properties to the east and lower,1 think we can try to address that and try to get back to you.
Mayor Furlong: As you look at some of these suggestions or ideas in terms of noise or,
especially noise. I mean it seems to me that the relationship between the road and the homes
would really suggest whether or not a berm would be effective at all or not, right?
Paul Oehme: Right
Mayor Furlong: So is that something you're going to look at and whether.
Paul Oehme: Yep.
Mayor Furlong: Proposed improvement or action might be effective.
Paul Oehme: Ymb, in this particular case and I know we had looked at cross sections earlier on
and I do believe that a bens in this area will help alleviate some of those concerns.
Mayor Furlong: And that's fine. If we can look at those as options in the areas where they allow
but I hate to think that we're just to throw berms everywhere because.
Paul Oehme: No.
14
Chanhassen City Council It gust 8, 2011 •
Mayor Furlong: ... noise they're not going to do any good.
Paul Oehme: Exactly and in this particular instance, in this part of the project it does seem to
make sense that we can take a look at adding that type of future.
Mayor Furlong: Alright, thank you. Others who would like to address the council this evening.
We have time for everybody. Good evening.
Jamie Heilicher: My name is Jamie Heilicher, 9280 Kiowa Trail. Mainly we're looking at a
situation, we've been living there for 25 years and obviously the added traffic on 101 is, has
become, an issue and always has been. We're more concerned about the concept that the City
Council looks at which is widening Kiowa Trail and creating a through street for Kiowa to 101
from the development of Springfield and properties to the north of Springfield. The concern
obviously is that opening up Kiowa Trail, which is now a dead end street and always has been, to
a through street will create a significant amount of additional traffic for all of those people
looking to go south on. 101 and rather than go up to Lyman and to 101 and south, they'll come
through our neighborhood and ultimately end up on 101 with a short cut so it's a concern that we
have as residents of Kiowa Trail. The consideration would be, if we're looking at trying to
mitigate the wetlands and what's being taken as a alternative to widening Kiowa Trail and
creating a through street would be to dead and Kiowa Trail at 101 giving you the opportunity to
narrow 101 down to only two lanes without having to create turn lanes and everything else and
moving Kiowa Trail, which only has 20 homes through Springfield to Lyman which you know I
mean obviously we'd rather keep it the way it is and keep it a dead end street, but given the fact
that it's likely that if 101 is modified, they will end up creating a through street on Kiowa, thus
creating a lot of traffic so it's a consideration to you know look at because then you're taking a
lot less wetlands as you make that turn a lot Iess work A much less expensive alternative to
creating a larger intersection at the end of Kiowa Trail. Obviously you know there's 20 homes
that would have to drive through Springfield but you know from both standpoints it protects us
from having a through street and possibly saves the City some money atui some wetland areas.
Thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you, Excuse me sir, if you could come to the podium. State your mare
and address if you would. I just want to see if there's any comments at this point on that or
should we continue the public hearing?
Paul Oehme: Yeah, under this project we're not anticipating, we're not looking at connecting
Kiowa Trail to Springfield to the north there. That's a completely separate item at this time. The
City does in our ordinance try to limit the length of cuL-de-sacs to a specific length so that's,
that's for a future decision I think.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright, thank you. Others that would like to discuss. Sir. If you'd like
to or anyone else. If you could come to the podium please.
Jack Bell: I'm Pack Bell. I live on Kiowa Trail. Just with the safety issue and Kiowa Trail with
the cars coming off onto the highway... you block that off, open up the other end I tell you it's
Chanhassen City Council -',August 8, 2011
bad now getting on and if you're directing traffic left and right off of Kiowa Trail, a bad, I think
that would be really trouble there.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you for your comments. Mr. Bell your address on Kiowa Trail?
Jack Bell: 9371 Kiowa.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you.
Dan Horsfall: Good evening. My name Dan Horsfall and I live next door to Dave. 9610
Foxford. On one of the maps that has all the property parcels identified, I'm number 12. 1 hope
my comments are not out of place at this point. This is the first opportunity that I've been aware
of for public comment on the design as well. Not only the environmental worksheet. I mean
there have been open houses but that hasn't been the same thing as coming before you with
design questions as well. And my first question is actually you know with design issues, since
the State and the Federal governments are providing most of the money here, does the City effect
have any authority to mandate design changes?
Mayor Furlong: Mr. Oehme. Or Mr. Horn.
Paul Oelune: Since we are on the parties involved with the, in the improvements and we do have
some authority in terms of design criteria's and other aspects of the project. In teens of you
know MnDOT requirements for site distances and pavement sections that the County's going to
require, you know those type of things we don't have too much jurisdiction over. We do have
jurisdiction over stormwater quality and quantity components but in terms of design criteria's,
alignments and you know how those things are laid out, you know we have limited, limited
recourse I guess.
Mayor Furlong: And I guess to add to the confusion, while the City is the organization that's
leading this project, it's currently a State road that will become a County road and it's being
funded by Federal and State dollars. Is that correct?
Jon Hom: Correct.
Mayor Furlong: So okay, soother than the school district I think we've got you covered... so if
you've got some questions let's get them out and we can try to figure out what we can do.
Dan Horsfall: Well thank you very much. I wanted to make sure that this wasn't, you know
wasn't a done deal already and we're just here for the exercise. I think it's a wonderful idea that,
you know I understand the benefit of moving the Bandimere Park access. I think there's a great
benefit to straightening the road. I think there's a great benefit to leveling the road. There's an
awful lot of accidents where people simply fall off the edge of the road down there at the bottom
of that curve. That's a good idea if we can fix that. What I would like to challenge is the benefit
of widening the road from 3 lames, or to 5 lanes particularly when you consider all of the assorted
costs. We're not sure that that's been done yet in terms of costs, not just in dollars and cants for
developing the road itselfbut dollars, but costs to the adjacent property owners. You know
16
Chanhassen City Council �ugust 8, 2011 0
we're going to have increased noise. Increased traffic. You know all of these things. You've
considered them Substantial tree loss and consequent loss of property value and things like that
and so with respect to the last point we see great incremental coat and almost no benefit to the
extra lanes. The 5 Isere freeway just rosily isn't justifiable you know. Straightening the road,
yes. Leveling the road, yes. Widening the road, not necessary I don't think. At least not yet.
Not in my opinion. Besides that I have an additional point, Along with all the other problems
that we're trying to solve, I have a problem with this road. It takes me too long to get from the
top to the bottom. If you imagine driving from Lyman Boulevard to downtown Shakopee,
you've got to wind down the hill and wait for the light at Pioneer Trail and you've got to wind
down 101 and wait for 2 or 3 lights to get through at Tri-Y. Okay and adding another lane
doesn't solve that. Adding another lane doesn't solve the end to end travel time so there's a
problem in my opinion that hasn't even been looked at or hasn't even been considered. Or
maybe has been considered end was dismissed. I'll give you that But to me it's a problem that
another argument that the 5 lane design adds additional cost and no benefit. So I would request
from the City another alternative. This Is not the preferred alternative for me. There's not only
two. Where it said no build versus 5 lane freeway, those are not the only two alternatives. You
know there has to be another alternative somewhere in the middle. I'm willing to compromise. I
think a 3 lane road with turn lanes accomplishes nearly all that you want to accomplish at far less
cost. I'd like to consider other alternatives or I'd like to at least hear some of them discussed you
know. Perhaps if the road was narrower it could even be straighter. You know take a little bit
more out ofthe inside ofthe S curves. Do we really need a 10 foot bike lane on both sides ofthe
road? Could the project be done in multiple phases? My understanding that the follow-up
project going southbound from Pioneer Trail down to Shakopee is so far out in the future as to be
completely invisible. Can we phase this? Can we have phase I be a 3 lane road and hold off on
adding the other 2 lanes until the rest ofthe project Is ready to build? Yes I know we want a
major connection from 212 to Shakopee or from Chanhassen to Shakopee but until the last
section is complete there's no point on them working on this section and making this section a 5
lane freeway. So open end questions. They're not have to be answered tonight but those are my
concerns. I'd really like to work with you on a mutually agreeable design that doesn't
necessarily involve turning this road into a freeway at this point Thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you.
Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, council, if I may, Paul or Jon, could you talk a little bit about the
schedule. This is the public hearing for the environmental review portion of it but we will be
having citizen input on the design aspect also down the line. Can you give, the public a little
update on the schedule.
Jon Horn: Yeah correct. What's been done to date Mayor and Council is the development of a
preliminary alignment for the purposes of looking at the environmental impacts associated with
that That's the process we're going through tonight The purpose of tonight's meeting is really
to get comment and feedback from the residents and property owners in the area to better
understand what those concerns are. Ultimately over the next few months we'll be working to
try to address those comments and ultimately be back to the council to make a decision on the
environmental impacts associated with the project If the project then moves forward from there
we would be going through a preliminary design process which would allow for additional
Chanhassen City Council - eiugust 8, 2011
public involvement process there as well and then that final design process really wouldn't be
done until close to the end of 2012 so we really have you know a year and a quarter, year and a
half still of work ahead of us still ultimately before we come up with the final design and start
construction.
Todd Gerhardt: As a part of the environmental assessment portion of this we want to hear
everybody's feedback, even on the design but right now we have looked at the ultimate so it
would give us the impact environmentally to the area.
Jon Hom: Correct. And the environmental document does include a traffic analysis so in terms
of some additional background information on how we got to a 4 lane roadway versus a 2 lane
roadway, there's some documentation information in the environmental document on that A lot
of conversations tonight about the fact that MnDOT and Carver County are involved as well so
this is something that the City needs to work with as partners as well to try to come up with the
design that's currently a tmnk highway, ultimately a turn back to Carver County and will be their
roadway as well so those are all issues in terms of responding to Mr. Horsfall's comments, those
are things we're going to have to look into. But again that's what we're here for tonight. Get
comments. We'lI be addressing those comments as a part ofthe BAW document process.
Mayor Furlong: Other comments. Sure.
Tim Erhart: I'm Time Erhart, 9611 Meadowlark Lane in Chanhassen. IJonorable Mayor and
council people. Persons. Thanks for the opportunity to speak. I've lived in this area 30 years.
31 years now. Very familiar with the area. Jon I give you credit. You hit all the negative points
on your first power point slide. I think all of us in the area know and agree with you on that but
you missed one major point in this area. It's probably one of the most beautiful and interesting
one mile section of roadway in Chanhassen and I think it's one of the reasons that we enjoy
living in this area so much and not to take away the need to improve it's performance as a road.
We don't want to be left with essentially a, just a construction site when we're all done and I'm
concerned that you use the word mitigate on one of your following slides but I don't, I'm not
sure what this is going to look like when it's done. Could I ask you to kind of you know what
we all live with in 101 is a wall of trees on both sides from Bandnnene Park to Pioneer Trail.
Could you explain or what the tree removal is? When I talk about the wall of trees on both sides,
what is the tree removal plan and what's going to be left in your mind today?
Jon Horn: Yeah in terms of specifics, the layout that shows on the power point, if we could get
the overhead to work, actually shows what's been identified as the preliminary construction
limits. I don't know Paul ifyou can kind of point that out It shows that kind of red in there.
Through the preliminary design process we've looked for ways to try to m;,,;m;ze those impacts
in terms of what the limits are of oonstruction. As it has been mentioned earlier tonight there
will be tree impacts associated with that as preliminary design process moves forward. We want
to identify the specifics on all those tree impacts and removals as well as to try to come up with
plans to mitigate that. A long corridor, I know avery wide corridor in terms of trying to get into
all the specifies tonight If you have a specific area in particular? I mean it's hard to say.
Chanhassen City Council lugust S. 2011 40
Tim Erhart: Oh specifically I'm thinking of the west side there through the whole carve,
between the curve and the pond. I mean there's hundreds of oaks on that hill that I believe are
all going to be gone or not?
Jon Horn-. Yeah Paul can you maybe go to the next. Yeah, there you go. Maybe highlight or
circle, follow the construction limit line.
Paul Oehme: On the west side here so it's this.
Todd Gerhardt: Jon so you're saying anything inside that red line.
Jon Horn: Inside of that will be the limits of construction.
Todd Gerhardt: Will be grubbed out and graded for alopes and ponds like any roadway.
Jon Horn: Yeah and I think maybe Mr. Erhart, correct me if I'm wrong, your specific question
is relative to where that stormwater pond is proposed.
Tim Erhart: Yeah and south. South.
JonHorn: South of there.
Tim Erhart. Yeah that's all wooded from there all the way to West 90 or.
Paul Oehme: Yeab, West 96*.
Tim Erhart: Yeah so that's all wooded today. That's all oaks in that area. Steep hill. I gather
those are all being removed?
Jon Horn: A number of those will be.
Tim Erhart: Is the east? Okay so la s finish that area That area is all being removed I believe,
correct?
Jon Horn: Inside that dashed, inside that dashed lino
Tim Erhart: All the maturetrees. Well even north of that.
Paul Oehme: Even north of there?
Tim Erhart: Yeah. That's well then, that stretch, that's all being rcmoved correct?
Jon Hom: That's generally pretty close. There's a wetland in there and that's generally very
close to the edge of that existing wetland.
Chanhassen City Council - August 9, 2011
Tim Erhart: No but it's a wall of trees and from there to the south to your proposed wetland,
that's all mature oaks.
Todd Gerhardt: Jon, is that the existing right-of-way line? The red line. Is there any additional
easements that need to be purchased in that area?
Jon Rom: There is correct.
Tim Erhart: Yeah I know and again it's not an issue. So then let's go on the east side. Right
now you start with Bandimere Park. There's trees that were planted there when the park was
built going all the way south. There's a stand of stature trees along the hill where your pointer is
and then into your neighborhood. Are those trees going? Staying?
Audience: Yeah. All going.
Tim Erhart: Everything's gone so we're taking this beautiful one mile section and flattening it
Iike a tomado. Like a tomado going through there and it begs another question is that's bothered
me more recently and I've talked to Paul about it is, as I started thinking about that I wonder why
we have, we have one retail, commercial entrance on 212 into Chanhassen. It's on 212 and 101.
It's kind of where people get off if they want to go into town from the east certainly and there's
no, there's been no replanting since 101 was done there either from approximately Lake Susan
all the way down to Lyman and you know I think we all hoped that there would be some
construction going on in that area and maybe that would bring some replanting of trees but with
the economy today who knows. You know I guess what I'm asking Jon your group and the City
Council and the County if they're listening is that you know we need to think about what we're
taking away and putting in a plan to try to truly mitigate what we're taking away from this area.
And moreover to look at our entranceway into Chanhassen from the east and that whole 101/212
intersection here. You know we've got areas that are nearly invisible to the public. Audubon
and some of the streets that go past General Mills over there where we put beautiful boulevard
trees in those areas when those streets were constructed and I think this area certainly deserves as
much consideration as those streets. So I'm just asking for you know let's give this
consideration that I think this area deserves for making it beautiful. I'd like to see in 30 years
that this looks like Dell Road and with that is they have a wall of trees there. It's a G lane road
with a median and bike, 10 foot bike trails on either side I believe and I'd like to see us start
moving forward on that.
Mayor Furlong: I guess Mr. Horn a question I'd have is, the current plan for mitigation and tree
removal, what is in the plan? I don't know if you've seen that or not.
Jon Horn: Yeah, and Mayor based upon Mr. Erhart's comments it sounds like you know again
the purpose for tonight is to gather comments. Based upon the comments it sounds like we
needed to do a better job for the neighbors identifying what those tree impacts would be in a little
more detail as well as provide a response in terms of what the mitigation measures are in
response to that and that's something as apart of our comments to the comments tonight we will
address as a part ofthat environmental document.
19 20
Chanbassen City Council - August 8, 2011 0 Chanhassen City Council = august 8, 2011
Mayor Furlong. Okay.
Tim Erhart: Okay, thank you.
Doug Duchon: Mr. Mayor, council members.
Mayor Furlong: Good evening.
Doug Duchon: My name is Doug Duchon. I'm at 9630 Foxford Road. I can show it up hero on
the overhead. I'm one of those on the east side. I'm at that property right there and I think a lot
of people have stated a lot of the things that I had prepared and have gone through it so I'm
going to go through the same issues but I do voice the same ooneems. With my property I Will
be impacted what I consider significantly. You ask the question about what trees are being
removed. If you walk along that path that goes along the backside of my property there are
spruce trees there that are 30-40 feet tall. They would be specimen trees. I could see them being
on the Capitol lawn for a Christmas tree and that's probably where they'll and up. Pm not sure
but if it goes through. Basically the backside of my property when I moved in tore 22 years
ago was very limited vegetation and as part of, one of the things I did to beautify my property in
conjunction with the people that put in prairie, I worked on that as well, I put in trees and a lot of
those trees were planted back 22 years ago. Moved in there to protect myself from the road and
to take and beautify that section of it and the with the way it is right now and the alignment of
the road, all those trees, my entire back property and I went back there and measured and my
wife went back there and actually measured girth on the trees to identify what those trees were
and we'll lose in excess of 75 trees. So that back side. I will also lose approximately a third of
an acre of property for that, and that's just on my property. The next adjacent property, which
has a direct impact on me as well, has the settling pond in it, and somebody asked the question
what's a settling pond for? What does it do? And right now it does drain off. That's a dry area
down there. In fact I mow grass down there for my neighbor and my neighbors arc having some
problem They're not going to be here to speak so I'll try to speak on their behalf. In that
property basically gets cut in half. They lose half of their property for a settling pond to be in
that condition or in that location, and this is an area that's drained and it drains on it's own. It's
dry continuously. That pond, if you imagine it, you say what do drew ponds look like? All you
have to do is drive down 212. Look off to the sides on 10). You see those little algae and the
scum on the top. You can imagine going out there and walking the back of that prairie or even
walking on that trail and having the mosquitoes eat you alive or carry you off. So that area for it
i would ask consideration for finding other ways to drain that water or move that water. It's
moving right now. There was a culvert that was put in. We haven't bad any problems. The
other area or the other concern is, is the safety that's involved with that as well. That's right next
to a trail. There's water theta. There's kids that go by that trail all the time. We have kids in our
back yard. We have a swing set that's out there very close and Id be concerned about those kids
getting into that pond or having problems with that pond. So I think the questions that were
asked, I think Dan asked a very good question. I come from an engineering background and
typically when I do projects I get asked what are all the options? How do you know what the
best option is7 I know there's other options that have been looked at but from this one we
haven't seen anything smaller and looking at it, 5 Imes of highway in one of the most beautiful
areas that I know of. This is one of the things that I come home at night I drive through that
section.. After seeing this I sit down and imagine what it looks like. You can imagine it next
time you drive down there. Take the left hand, or I'm sorry. The west side of the road. Clean
that off. You will look across that pond. You will see the houses on 96t' Street. There'll be
nothing across that marabland. That will extend up into my property on the other side and it will
bo just a prairie grassland that exists so once you clean out that entire corridor o£the trees,
you've basically lost the character of a section, a piece of Chanhassen that I think is extremely
important And I feel that we should take and at least discuss how we can make that safer. I
understand that but also to accommodate the other people, the beauty of our city. When you
look at it, it's an extremely wide street. I think the width of it will also encourage, you say I will
build it they will come. As you build that, there's going to be more and mote traffic. And
there's going to be significantly more traffic. Another concern that I have on it is, that road right
now is pasted or is intended to be a 40 miles an hour road. I would expect that through the
lifetime of that road that it's maintained at 40 miles an hour, and I'm going to guess that with
widening that road and just knowing that section, that the speeds will increase and continue to
increase. We'll also get a lot more truck traffic so I would ask that you go back and look at it
Right now we've got two bike lanes on there. I walk out on the bike path. I talk to people on my
bike path. Pve never seen a congested area on there where they've had to go and pass or say
I've got to move to the other side of the road. A 10 footwide bike path on one side would be
sufficient At least preserve a little bit of the area So 1 guess in concluding l'd like to ask a
couple things. One, that you consider re-evaluate. Go back and look at preserving the beauty of
Chanhassen. That little stretch of road. It's a one mile section and I consider it paradise on my
way home from work. Being able to look at it. Being able to say Igo into this little reserve,
Hop back out again and hopefully we can preserve a section of that. That when you look at it
and considering it, you look at the sight lines. You say irs not just about putting in a road.
Creating some more concrete. Moro asphalt and saying yeah, we can pump a lot more people
through there but you preserve the character of it I would ask that the City, and this is one of the
things that I felt very strongly about within Chanhassen is that you have the desire to have an
environment that's very good. Very impaotfud to the people that are around it. You have
ordinances there looking at trees saying that if you take trees out, you'd better put them back.
What were seeing within this project is literally taking out thousands of trees, and some of these
ate mature oaks. There's a mature spruce in thee. It's a beautiful place and you're just taking
time away and saying hey, you know what. Concrete, asphalt, they rule. I would also like to
see the bike path removed on it. On one side. I understand about the noise. We've talked about
that Focus on safety and in that safety making sure that we maintain that 40 miles an hour. It's
an important thong and I know that coming across the freeway over on this side, it's up to 45 and
I can see that as the State looks at itagain they say hey, you know what? That corridor's worth a
50 or 55. Each one of those creates more safety issues as well in that you have a path next to it
So with that I would like you aU, I thank you all for taking the time to listen to me. I am kind of
choked up about it I apologize but
Becky Duchon: We appreciate you as city officials listening to us and we appreeiate you
representing us and our concerns.
Doug Duchon: Thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Very good, thank you.
Chanhassen City Council gust g, 2011
David Blanski: rm David Blanski. I live at 9350 Great Plains Boulevard. I've been there for
30 plus years. Getting kind of elderly. My hearing is failing a little bit. The young lady when
you gave your presentation did you say the decibels were going to increase by 5?
Beth Kunkel: Less than 5 in most cases.
David Blmld,. Okay, and what is the baseline now?
Beth Kunkel: In the 45 to 50 decibel right now.
David Blanski: Okay. It's been a long time since I was in high school but a 5 decibel increase is
not a simple arithmetic percentage increase is it? It is an algebraic increase. How much of an
Increase is that really? And I know there are charts like a rallroad train or different things or
birds, what difference will there really be in the noise?
Audience: Just from a ... point ofphysics there's a pressure level...rm sorry.
Mayor Furlong: It may be the same answer but let's let the consultants respond to the question.
Beth Kunkel: Decibels are on a logarithmic scale. Generally a 3 decibel increase is considered a
doubling of the noise at the same distance. So a 5 decibel increase, actually up to 3 decibels is
not considered perceptible according to federal guidelines. Anything above and beyond 3
decibels is considered a perceptible noise change. Put it in perspective again 70 decibels for
daytime noise is considered the threshold at the federal level. The table shows that most of the
existing residences along the corridor in that 45 and some into the 55 decibel categories at their
specific, the distance from their, the road to their home. So that's, I don't know does that answer
your question?
David Blanski: Did I understand you to say that at 3 decibel increase was a double of the noise?
Beth Kunkel: I want to correct that I believe it's a 10 decibel increase is a doubling of the
noise. 3 decibel is where it's perceptible. 3 decibel increase is where its perceptible.
David Blanski: Thank you. I just wanted to be sure that people understood that it wasn't simple
to figure. I've had quite a bit of experience with berms over the years because I permitted a
number of mining sites and people were always interested in noise and I hope people understand
that simply building a berm does not eliminate the noise. It may protect their home if they're
directly behind the berm, but the people in the next block may have considerably increased
noise. We had locations where people couldn't bear our rock crushers until we put in the berms
and then they heard them 2 %a miles away so the berm or wall is not necessarily the solution. On
my side rve been watering some old oaks. I think 3 of them would begone. I'm sure they're all
over 100 years old. Number of ohms in there too. I hate to see those go. Actually the traffic
since the roadway was improved the last time has been reduced because the people that were
coming down that now take Powers to get on, and I don't know if you've done any traffic counts.
I know from going to the mailbox a couple times a day, it's a lot easier to get across the street
23
Chanhassen City Council - August 8, 2011
Another gentleman commented on the speed I agree with that 100516 because most the people
going by are going 50 miles an hour and if you want safety, get the sheriffto enforce the speed
limits there. I don't know if it's an environmental issue or not but I question the need for the
tunnel. I don't think I hardly over see anybody walking to the Bandiraere Park and I live right
across the street. Do you folks in the audience see the need for the tunnel? is someone in favor
of it?
Mayor Furlong: Sir, if you can address your comments and questions here.
David Blansld: Okay, well would you gentlemen look into the need for the tunnel.
Mayor Furlong: To the extent you've mentioned it, I'm sure it will be apart of the report.
David Blanski: Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak.
Mayor Putiong, Thank you. Appreciate your comments.
Sharon Gatto: Good evening. I'm Sharon Gatto at 9631 Foxford.
Mayor Furlong: Good evening,
Sharon Gatto. So I'm in the neighborhood that's east of the 101 but I'm not adjacent to 101, so
the impact to me is I'm worried why we moved into this area. We moved in because we were
still rural.. We have trees. You drive your motorcycle up and down 101 and it's just beautiful.
Whether you're going south or you're going north. It's beautiful. And I understand
devolopment because our development, we have 214 acres. We were developed 20 years ago so
we ruined some farmland because of our development but it seems like every city wants to tear
down everything that's beautiful and put in development. I don't know if it's tax money but they
want to develop every little comer of the beautitbl country we have herein Chanhassen and I
wanted to know, now that powers is done why do we even need this? I drive 101 minimum of
twice a day. To and from work and weekends all day long. I don't see a problem with one lane
going each direction I don't see a problem. What I see a problem with some of the curves.
People can take Powers if that bothers them in the winter, let them take Powers. We finished
Powers oil. Why do we have to look like Powers? That's what it's going to look like. It's
pretty naked and an both sides. Thank you
Mayor Furlong: Anyone else who would like to provide public comment. Good evening sir.
Bob Mask: My name is Bob Hank. I live 770 Pioneer Trail. Could we see the picture of the
plat. I live a ways off 101 but it affects me directly and the reason it does, it's the photograph.
Do you mind if I point out where I live?
Mayor Furlong: Sure.
Bob Hank: I live 1 believe it's right here. Okay when I look in my, when I look from my back
yard to the cast, to the north or to the south across Pioneer Trail, all the water that's generated in
24
. Chanhassen City Council - August g, 201I
that area comes through my property. Tsvery bit of it. It comes from the other side of 101. Fox
whatever, Gagne's old property. My concern is adding a roadway will add to that water. Right
now when I get, when we get 2 or 3 inches of rain, 60% of my property and my neighbor's
properties to the cast are under water. And so I certainly like the idea of s holding pond. My
question is though how much water goes into the holding pond before it overflows and then
come, finds it way through my property? I really think something needs to be looked at with
regard to that. I do like the idea of upgrading 101 but, and I do think some of the points that
were made this everting were very valid with regard to trots, properties. I'm a bicyclist and I
would like to see bike paths on both sides but the watees my main concern It has gotten worst
over the years. I was at council meetings in the late 90's. The City said we need to do
something and it just kind of stopped there so anyway, do we have a specific idea bow much rain
it would take for the holding pond to overflow? Any idea? 1 don't need an answer tonight.
Mayor Furlong: Mr. Horn?
Ion Horn: Yeah, Mayor and council those are good comments. We weren't aware of that.
Those are things we can look into farther but generally we mentioned the 3 stormwater ponds.
The purpose for those 3 stormwater ponds is they basically take all runoff from the new
roadway. Route it into a stormwater pond at which point it would be stored or attenuated so that
the discharge would be less then or equal to the pre -rates before the construction. So the
stormwater ponds, basically one of the purposes of those is to make sore we're discharging a rate
that's less than it is today.
Mayor Furlong: Okay so right now when it rains, anything that hits the road or anywhere else
just runs off.
Jon Horn: Goes through ditches and then ultimately into the wetland system
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
Jon Horn: After construction everything would be picked up by a pipe system. Routed to ponds
where it would be stored, attenuated and then ultimately discharged to the similar locations.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. At a rate that's equal to or less than.
Jon Horn; Or less than, yap.
Mayor Furlong: The current flow. Okay.
Bob Haak Thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you.
Todd Gerhardt: Jon, Mayor.
Mayor Furlong: Yes.
Chanhassen City Council -august g, 2011
Todd Gerhardt: Jon, you can put a graph together to show the drainage ofthis area. Where the
water's going to flow. Where the emergency overflow from the pond, where that water will go.
So as we get more detail on this plan we can put a graph together to show that.
Jon Hom: Right and correct and there is also information within the current environmental
document that provides additional details on that so if anybody wants to understand that better
they can certainly go look at the document and it provides additional background information.
Mayor Furlong: And if they have questions on what's in the document, direct them to Mr.
Oehme first and then if you can answer them you will, otherwise we'll get others involved,
PaulOehme: Absolutely.
Mayor Furlong. Okay. Thank you.
Todd Gerhardt: Maybe we can bring Bob's daughter back and she can educate everybody on
water flowage.
KathyHorsfall: rm Kathy Homfisli, 9610 Foxford Road. I think everyone has eloquently said
most o£what I wanted to say already but I did have one specific question aside from the fan that,
do we really need a Slane freeway with bike paths on both sides for the foreseeable future that
will only lead to Haile.? So that's my question fast. But secondly I would like to know on the
noise measurements, were those made at ground level or at house level?
Beth Kunkel: I don't remember the exact height but noise levels essentially I think it's 4 %a feet,
which is roughly 4 or 5'/a feet roughly per level in the front yard of all the residences.
Kathy Horsfall: In the front yard.
Beth Kunkel: Well, the side of the yard closest to the road.
Kathy Horsfall: Okay because my concern is that of course 101 and most of our homes are up
on a hill and we're you know 2'/s stories above that on our bedroom and in the winter we notice
a definite increase in noise as the trees lose their leaves so if the trees are totally gone, it's going
to be. even more dramatic and I would like to know if there's a way to measure that affect at the
level at which we actually live, not where we mow the lawn.
Beth Kunkel: The details of the noise analysis are in a noise report which might answer a tot of
those questions ifyou want to look at the details.
Kathy Horsfall: Because I appreciated the comment about them being logarithmic. We notice
right in the winter. Other than that I think everybody's said everything I warned to say.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you.
25 26
Chanhassen City Council fugust 8, 2011
Carol Dunmore: Carol Dunsmore, 730 West 90' Street. West 9& Street and 101 is probably
the most dangerous, one of the most dangerous intersections in the city, Ifanybody's familiar. If
anybody's coming northbound on 101, trying to take a left turn onto West 90 Street. I have a
MO truck and if I wasn't up that high in that truck there's no way I would make a left on that
street. I would go all the way north, up to Bandimcm and go through Bandimere and wine back
south and take a right on West 96 h. I refuse to even take my horse trailer empty with no horses
in it and go north on 101 and take a left on West 96a` so I think this project is fantastic that
they're trying to straighten out that curve a little bit there. Trying to shave down a hill. I can't
wait. It's just you know we've been so fortunate of all the people on West 9& Street and I've
been there 31 years also, that no one's been killed and so I'm really looking forward to that.
Making it 4 lanes, I don't understand that at all. I would like to know if a 3 lane was ever looked
at. We definitely need a left turn lane and a right turn lane onto West 96'" and the other streets
also on 101, but 4 lanes and with a concrete divider is just lace way too much. I agree, like the
gal had said about Powers Boulevard. Do we want another Powers Boulevard? I mean I know
they're not going to be able to straighten it that much but the beauty of 101 with it's curves and
Ws hills is so astonishing and Mr. Erhart's comments on the loss of those trees along there, I
hope all of you get a chance to drive down there a couple times, The mass of trees that have
been there like 30, 40, 50 years and the bike trail along the east side of 101 as you get closer to
Pioneer, the most beautiful, majestic pines that are so huge. It's like you're biking up north
through the pines. It is just awesome so the loss oftrees, that needs to be seriously, seriously
looked at. It's the noise and then it's quiet. It's just so quiet biking through those trees. It's just
awesome so I would like to find out you know why the 3 lane road wouldn't work where you've
got the center lane for your turns. It's just like yeah, we don't want another Powers Boulevard
coming down there. It's just stark. It's bare. It's ugly as sin so anyway, that's my comments.
Thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Other comments. Any other comments or questions. Tonight at the public
hearing. As I understood it, and let me make sure I've got the dates right. The public comment
period, even after tonight, well close out the public hearing when everybody's done but public
comments can still be made in written form, is that correct Mr. Horn?
Jon Horn: Correct. Up until August 2e.
Mayor Furlong: And those should be submitted to Mr. Oehme I think was the address with the
information here.
Jon Horn: Correct
Mayor Furlong: So if people have question or if they have other comments or if they waut to
reinforce their comments tonight with written comments they're welcome to do that as well. Is
that correct?
Paul Oehme: Tbat's correct.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Anybody else wish to speak this evening at the public hearing? If not, is
there a motion to close the public hearing.
Chanhassen City Council -'August 8, 2011
Councilwoman Ernst: So moved.
Mayor Furlong: Motion's been made to close the public hearing. Is there a second?
CouncilwomanTjomhom: Second
Mayor Furlong: Motion's been seconded. Any discussion?
Councilwoman Ernst moved, Councilwoman Tjornbom seconded to close the public
hearing. Anvoted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0. The
public hearing was closed.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you everybody for your comments. We appreciate it. I know that staff
and our consultants will take those under advisement and work with you as well on those
question. As we continue on now with the next item on our agenda We're going to keep
moving here so if you have conversations you want to take them out to the hallway, we'd
appreciate it so we can keep moving. We have consideration of amendments to Chapter 20 of
our zoning codes.
CITY CODE AMENDMEN' CONSIDER AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 20, ZONING
CONCERNING PAL4TBALL COURSES AND Sii0 INGANGES,• INCLUDING
APPROVAL OF SU Y ORDINANCE FOR PUBLICATION PURPOSES.
Kate Aanenon: Thank you Mayor, members of the city Council. This is actually two items
before you tonight Two code amendments to accomplish the goal that we have here. The City
is amending the code to allow for pamtball courses and gun ranges in the community so in order
to have those two uses permitted it would require two code amendments. One code amendment
would be in Chapter 11 which would permit the discharge of firearms in the city in these
approved paintball or gun facilities. And the second one in Chapter 20 would provide those
standards for the paintball comes and for the gun ranges.
Mayor Furlong: Gentlemen, I'm sorry. If you'd like to continue your conversation outside or if
you could listen, thank you.
Kate Aanenon: I'm sorry, thank you.
Mayor Furlong: No, Ms. Aanenon.
Kate Aanenon: So the Planning Commission did hear this item on July 19ei. They reviewed the
two code amendments and they discussed some of the things that I'll talk about in a little bit
more detail. They did recommend on a 7 too approval ofthe amendments but they just had a
couple concerns and the more specifically regarding the conditional use standards and the
interim use itself. So the Cast ordinance amendment would allow for indoor gun ranges and as
established with the two zoning districts that we created and the standards would be that one,
they could be permitted in the, in the industrial office park and then they'd also have, could be
27 1 28
1"
Affidavit of Publication
Southwest Newspapers
State of Minnesota)
)SS.
County of Carver )
Laurie A. Hartmann, being duly sworn, on oath says that she is the publisher or the authorized
agent of the publisher of the newspapers known as the Chaska Herald and the Chanhassen Vil-
lager and has full knowledge of the facts herein stated as follows:
(A) These newspapers have complied with the requirements constituting qualification as a legal
newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute 331A.02, 331A.07, and other applicable laws, as
amended. ^^yy
(B) The printed public notice that is attached to this Affidavit and identified as No. 9 53
was published on the date or dates and in the newspaper stated in the attached Notice and said
Notice is hereby incorporated as part of this Affidavit. Said notice was cut from the columns of
the newspaper specified. Printed below is a copy of the lower case alphabet from A to Z, both
inclusive, and is hereby acknowledged as being the kind and size of type used in the composition
and publication of the Notice:
abcdefgbijkimnopgrstuvwxyz
By:✓� l/t�'v
Laurie A. Hartmann
Subscribed and sworn before me on
this day of 2011
� AA - � Q. &- A
No� blic
T
=MINNESOTA
RATE INFORMATION
Lowest classified ratepaid by commercial users for comparable space.... $31.20 per column inch
Maximum rate allowed by law for the above matter ................................ $31.20 per column inch
Rate actually charged for the above matter ............................................... $12.59 per column inch
LI
7700 AbrWBQidevafd
PO&x: 147.
C1 dnh3as,38VYN 55311 T
AdmInIst0elon
Fax: 9 52,227A Il 0
9�0 1.0 1 . aq'Inage-04108
ftmc 962,22711.80
PAX: 9.521227.1190,:
I ZT-11.6
Fax,15222T11 70
Finance
Phow.952-2271140:
FaxA.52:227.1110.
PitkA RoOr0afi.o.n.
9.52.227,112-0.
Phona., 952227140D..
Pbft 9522.2-71 M:
. .Fax: 962:2271110.
-ftohcwnrl s
7701 Pa,&Placo
Tbonn: 952.2271-M!
F?x.-. 952.227.1310
Phone: 0.52,227.1125
Fax: -9-52,227I110
MEMORANDUM
TO: Todd Gerh.ar.dt, City Manager.
FROM: Paul 06hme- Din of Piibfic- Works/City Eag, fteer
DATE: August 9, 20 11
STJBJ: Public Hea .n$ for EA/EAW
TH 101 Improvements, Lyraan.Boul (;vard to Pioneer Trail
City Pr0j0ct*.PIW67F4a-.
-PROPO$0NOWN
9W
comm.
City Q'6=61 4pproVdI requires a stippl*e:.fti 0j nt. ori . vote of the City Council
y
pre SO rit,
BACKGROUND
(Over the past nizair_ oiitlzs; .Cl AWffha b- "'Wb i WifI"r� 78.'
of
.
AD l Carver County PB rreddsi for t -e Te,oristract10of
TH. 4-01. between Lyman.Boulevard (C-SA-1418) and P.ioneer Trail:-(CS-Aff 14). TH
-101 is. prop
osed: to from a,twolane xural, section toafibur-U. e
divided,urban-section:design.. The intent.is to have ill-prcliminary -.4esi.gn-:=-
6 ronmentalreviews and ' r- Is lbr.ihe- pro ect co eted `by DecdrAbef*20-1 I to
�ap mp.
,p Ova
All, v in ate.201 1 or-. 10.12. -Project
'. planned for 2013.
TH *10.1 is p gppose4.to be reconstructed to a four -lane: 0
'ane: divided design: 9 .
podp%ria��e trails along both sides of the roadway. -The: .... imary oals., ofthe,
Pr goals
p.r.Qj.cct are as follows:
Improve safety for people along the existing T14.101 corridor
Reduce crashes to the extent possible
Add'turn:lanestopro-videsafettirniii.g.moN,,enientsatinterse*ttions
Improve sight distance by reduc ing sharp: curves and steep grades pear
... 5 ..
Intersections
Im_pyove capacity and connoctioty.4ong.the-TH 101 corridor
✓ Accommodate regional. and local transportation.needs .Of anticipated..population
and:,mplioyraent growfli-in:theTH WIcorridor -by increasing traffic capacity
ChWiass.epN. I a Communfly The Lif 6 : Pnivid" no 'W: Toty and'Planffli.ng. loor Ti)ji6ai)w
Todd Gerhardt
August 8, 2011
TH 101 Improvement: Public Hearing for EA(EAW
Page 2
Provide transportation solutions that minimize environmental impacts
✓ Avoid/minimize/mitigate impacts on environmental, social, and cultural resources
✓ Minimize need for new right of way takings from park, business and residential properties
The project construction is proposed to be financed primarily through Federal Transportation
Funding secured through the 2009 regional solicitation process and State funds. As a result of the
scope of the proposed improvements and the Federalfunding, the preparation of an Environmental
Assessment/Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA/EAW) is required to review the potential
environmental impacts of the project. The EA/EAW document was received by the Council on July
11, 2011 and the public hearing was called for August 8, 2011.
The EA/EAW notice was published in the EQB Monitor on June 27, 2011 and the public comment
period is proposed to extend from July 11, 2011 through August 24, 2011. Notice of the public
hearing was advertised in the Chanhassen Villager on July 21, 2011 and individual public hearing
notices were mailed to property owners in the project area. Two neighborhood meetings have been
held for the project; the first was on December 2, 2010 and the second was on June 22, 2011.
Representatives of the project consulting team will provide a brief overview of the project and the
EA/EAW at the public hearing.
The EA/EAW process requires that a public hearing be held to allow for public comment regarding
the accuracy of the EA/EAW document and the potential for the project to have significant impacts.
All comments provided either in writing during the public comment period or at the public hearing
will be considered and the EA/EAW document must be updated to address any substantive
comments. Once the comments have been addressed, the EA/EAW has been updated, and it has
been approved by MnDOT and the FHWA, the Council will be asked to approve the final document
and make a determination of whether the project has significant environmental impacts. The
schedule for the final approval and determination of impacts is dependent on the number and nature
of the comments received; however, we anticipate that the Council will be asked to make the final
determination in November or December 2011.
Attachment: Preliminary Layout
c: Bill Weckman, Carver County
Kristen Zschomler, MnDOT
Nicole Peterson, MnDOT
Jon Horn, Kimley-Horn & Associates
APPENDIX D - DRAFT NEGATIVE DECLARATION RESOLUTION
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA
DATE: __ December 12, 2011 RESOLUTION NO: 2011-
MOTION BY: SECONDED BY:
APPROVE RESOLUTION ACCEPTING EA/EAW FOR THE TH 101 IMPROVEMENTS,
CITY PROJECT PW67f4a, AND MAKING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION ON THE
NEED FOR AN EIS
WHEREAS, Chanhassen staff has been working with representatives of Mn/DOT and Carver
County to identify a preferred design for the reconstruction of TH 101 between Lyman Boulevard (CSAH
18) and Pioneer Trail (CSAH 14).
WHEREAS, TH 101 is currently a two-lane undivided roadway with a number of safety
deficiencies including steep grades, sharp curves, and inadequate sight distances resulting in blind
intersections; AND is proposed to be reconstructed to a four -lane divided design with pedestrian/bicycle
trails along both sides of the roadway.
WHEREAS, The proposed action was described and analyzed in an Environmental
Assessment/Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA/EAW) circulated to the EAW Distribution List
and others AND a Notice of Availability appeared in the EQB Monitor on June 27,2011; a public hearing
was held August 8, 2011; meeting the state requirements for environmental review
WHEREAS, 42 comments were received during the comment period, closing on August 24,
2011, which have been addressed by the City in a Findings of Fact document.
WHEREAS, The EA/EAW and the permit development processes related to the project have
generated information which is adequate to determine whether the project has the potential for significant
environmental effects.
WHEREAS, Areas where potential environmental effects have been identified will be addressed
during the final design of the project. Mitigation will be provided where impacts are expected to result
from project construction, operation, or maintenance. Mitigation measures are incorporated into project
design, and have been or will be coordinated with state and federal agencies during the permit process.
WHEREAS,.Based on the criteria in Minnesota Rules part 4410.1700, the project does not have
the potential for significant environmental effects.
NOW THERE BE IT RESOLVED an Environmental Impact Statement is not required for the
proposed Trunk Highway 101 project (City Project PW67f4a).
ATTEST:
Todd Gerhardt, City Manager Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor
YES NO ABSENT
Findings of Fact and Conclusions TH 101 (CSAH 18 to CSAH 14)
November 2011 SP 194-010-011
Based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions contained herein and on the entire record:
The City of Chanhassen, as the state Responsible Governmental Unit, hereby determines that the
changes in the proposed by the 101 Project (SP 149-010-011) in the City of Chanhassen, Carver
County are not substantial, do not have the potential for significant environmental effects, and
would not warrant preparation of an EIS. Therefore, preparation of an Environmental Impact
Statement is not warranted.
For the City of Chanhassen
Paul Oehme, P.E.
City Engineer/Director of Public Works
Findings of Fact and Conclusions
November 2011
Date
TH 101 (CSAH 18 to CSAH 14)
SP 194-010-011
APPENDIX E - EAW DISTRIBUTION LIST
Federal Agencies
Department of Agriculture
Department of Commerce
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Federal Transit Administration
State Agencies
Minnesota Environmental Quality Board
Minnesota Department of Health
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Minnesota Board of Soil and Water Resources
Minnesota State Archaeologist
Minnesota Historical Society
Minnesota Cultural Affairs
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
Minnesota Historical Society
Minnesota Department of Transportation Environmental Services
Minnesota Department of Transportation Office of Freight and Commercial Vehicle Operations
Regional Agencies
Carver County
Metropolitan Council
Riley Purgatory Creek Watershed District
Libraries
City of Chanhassen Library
Findings of Fact and Conclusions TH 101 (CSAH 18 to CSAH 14)
November 2011 SP 194-010-011
APPENDIX F - NOISE TABLES
Findings of Fact and Conclusions TH 101 (CSAH 18 to CSAH 14)
November 2011 SP 194-010-011
Table 4
2010 AM "Daytime" Rush Hour Counts and Projected Year No Build/Build.
R1
70
54.3
55.6
51.3
R2
70
63.6
57.4
58.2
R3
70
44.8
47
48.3
R4
70
49.5
51.8
53
R5
70
56.2
58.5
59.1
R6
70
49.7
51.9
52.6
R7
70
48.8
61.1
52
R8
70
49.5
52.2
52.8
R9
70
49.9
52.8
53.3
R10
70
51.8
54.7
55.2
R11
70 1
48.8
51.6
51.7
R12
70
48
50.9
50.5
R13
70
56.3
58.7
58.4
R14
70
51.5
53.9
54.2
R15
70
48.3
50.7
51.2
R16
70
46.9
49.4
49.9
R17
70
48.8
51.3
51.8
R18
70
51.7
54.4
54.8
R19
70
54.5
57.9
56.9
R20
70
48.5
51.51
51.5
R21
70
46.9
49.8
49.9
R22
70
46.1
49
49.1
R23
70
47.6
51.1
51.7
R24
70
45.8
49.2
49.7
R25
70
44.3
47.6
48.1
R26
70
56.4
60.2
58.1
MP1
70
55.6
58.5
58.6
MP2
70 1
55.3
58.6
60.5
MP3
70 1
55.3
58.7
58.8
epresents those locations exceeding daytime noise standard.
Table 5
2010 PM "Nighttime" Rush Hour Counts and Projected Year No Build/ Build
i' Represents those locations exceeding nighttime noise standard.