My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
5.4. SR 06-05-2006
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2000 - 2010
>
2006
>
06/05/2006
>
5.4. SR 06-05-2006
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/21/2008 8:36:10 AM
Creation date
6/2/2006 10:08:51 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
125
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />Existing Level of Congestion: Levels of Service A-B; un-congested - all abutting roads. <br />Existing Functional Classification: <br /> <br />Viking Boulevard (CH 31) <br />T,yin Lakes Road (ell 13) <br />Cleveland Avenue (CH 40) <br />Davis Street (CH 40) <br /> <br />Minor Arterial <br /> <br />l\Iinor p-.rterial <br /> <br />1\linor Collector <br />Minor Collector <br /> <br />Forecasted average dail)' traffic for 2025 with existing plus committed road improvements area as <br />follows, based on the City of Elk River Comprehensive Transportation Plan: <br /> <br />'Tiking Boulevard (CH 31) 10,600 <br />Twin Lakes Road (CH 13) 11,200 <br />Cleveland Avenue (CH 40) 7,900 * <br />Da\is Street (CH 40) 7,900 * <br />*CH 40 is scheduled for reconstruction between CSAH 12 and CSAH 13 beginning in 2006. This <br />,'alue is from Sherburne County Highway Department estimates. <br /> <br />Recommended improvement actions in the short term (through 2010) from the City <br />Transportation Plan identify a segment of Twin Lakes Road and Viking Boulevard adjacent to <br />the project site for roadway expansion and turn lanes as may be determined in a corridor stud)'. <br />Additionally it is recommended a corridor be identified for a connection of CH 33 into Anoka <br />County Dear Viking Boulevard be identified. Medium term (2001 to 2018) actions include the <br />reconstruction of CH 40 and classify the segment as a minor arterial. Additionally, it is <br />recommended that a new CH 33 connection to Viking Boulevard be constructed. These <br />recommendations, when implemented, will likely improve the level of senice to A and B. <br /> <br />The Applicant will create access points and construct minor improvements as may be required and <br />in conformance with the City of Elk River Transportation Plan. <br /> <br />This project provides a logical extension of City infrastructure. <br /> <br />28. Impact on infrastructure and public services. Will new or expanded utilities, roads, other <br />infrastructure or public services be required to serve the project? X Yes No. If yes, <br />describe the ne,,: or additional infrastructure or services needed. (Note: any infrastructure that is a <br />connected action with respect to the project must be assessed in the EA W; see EA W Guidelines for details.) <br />The project will require typical extensions of public roadways and utilities to serve the development. <br /> <br />29. Cumulative impacts. Minnesota Rule part 4410.1700, subpart 7, item B requires that the RGU <br />consider the "cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects" when determining the <br />need for an environmental impact statement. Identify any past, present or reasonably foreseeable future <br />projects that may interact \vith the project described in this EA W in such a \vay as to cause cumulative <br />impacts. Describe the nature of the cumulative impacts and summarize any other available information <br />relevant to determining whether there is potential for significant environmental effects due to cumulative <br />impacts (or discuss each cumulative impact under appropriate iteln(s) else11--'here on this fonn). <br /> <br />River Park (west of Liberty Heights Estates of Elk River) is in the beginning stage of deyelopment. <br />Trott Brook Farms (south of Riyer Park) is near the final phases of completion. Efforts are being <br />taken to coordinate planning '\Yith this development for extension of roads and utility services. Storm <br />,yater runoff '\-yill increase in 'Volume and not in rate of discharge. Recei'ving basins for storm '"tater <br />are affected by only this project. "7ater quality protection is provided in the Storm "Vater Pollution <br />Prevention Plan. Traffic volumes on the local and County road system serying this project and <br />adjacent projects will increase due to inadequate facilities as identified in the traffic study for this <br />project. Level of sen"ice at key intersections \"ill decline unless improvements are made. Air quality <br />may sho,",. small decreases at key intersections during rush hours due to traffic congestion. <br /> <br />30. Other potential environmental impacts. If the project may cause any adverse environmental impacts <br />not addressed by items 1 to 28, identify and discuss them here, along \vith any proposed mitigation. <br /> <br />There are no other potential impacts known at this time. <br /> <br />31. SUfnn12ry of issues. Do llO! cC/lnp!erc [his sccrion U- the EA Ii" is being done fCJr EIS scoping,. insiead, <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.