No preview available
 /
     
Document - Historical information/data - Environmental Impact Statement Interstate 35E DOT - 6/16/1976DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIDN FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION riN FOR z-zs,\ ELED\K(—)) NMI I--- --� U (� iDVLI i ThJLJ INTERSTATE EE IN DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA; FROM: SOUTH JCT. I35 to JCT. T.H. 110 PREPARED BY MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS MINNESOTA PRnJECT I 35E-4( STATE PROJECT 1982 FHWA-MN-EIS-76-04-D Federal Highway Administration Region 5 MINNESOTA PROJECT I 35E-4( ) STATE PROJECT 1982 INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 35E IN DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA FROM SOUTH JUNCTION WITH INTERSTATE 35 TO JUNCTION WITH STATE TRUNK HIGHWAY 110 ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Highway Administration AND STATE OF MINNESOTA Department of Highways SUBMITTED PURSUANT TO: 42 U.S.C. 4332 (2) (C) AND MINNESOTA STATUTES, SECTION 116D.01 et seq. - /6 /76 Date Date rank D. Marzite 1 Minnesota Departmen E. Dean Carlson Division Administrator Federal Highway Administration missioner Highways 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS E TITLE PAGE TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES SUMMARY SHEET SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION The Federal Action Description of the Proposed Action Purpose and Need of the Proposed Action Status of Land Use Planning History of Project Development and Current Status SECTION II ALTERNATIVES SECTION III DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA AND PROBABLE IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION Introduction Geology Water Resources Vegetation Wildlife Chemical Controls Air Quality Noise Impacts Community Facilities Historic Sites Open Space Aesthetics Population Characteristics Employment Neighborhoods v vii 2 2 4 14 20 23 27 28 32 37 44 48 52 54 57 62 68 70 75 81 84 85 Housing 85 Property Displacement 88 Relocation 90 Economics 91 Secondary Impacts 93 SECTION IV THE PROBABLE ADVERSE EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED 97 SECTION V THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOCAL SHORT TERM USES OF MAN'S ENVIRONMENT AND THE MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENT OF LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY 99 SECTION VI IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES 103 APPENDIX A 105 APPENDIS B 109 t iv LIST OF EXHIBITS AND TABLES Table Number Page Number I TH 13 Intersection Accident Rates 12 2 St. Paul Metropolitan Area Average Accident Rates 13 3 Historic Population Growth 30 4 Future Population Growth 30 5 Impacts to Wetlands 39 6 Vegetation Impacts 46 7 Wildlife Habitat Synopsis 51 8 Carbon Monoxide Concentrations 54 9 FHWA Design Noise Levels 57 10 State Noise Regulations 58 II Summary of Noise Analysis 58 12 Noise Impact on Residential Units 60 13 Historical -Archeological Areas 68 14 Age and Marital Status 81 15 Race and Nativity 82 16 School Enrollment and Years Completed 83 17 Occupation and Income 84 18 Places of Employment 84 19 Type of Dwelling and Length of Residence 86 20 Residences Impacted -By Value 86 21 Residences Impacted -By Municipality 87 22 Land Uses Displaced 88 Exhibit Number I Map of Proposed Action 3 2 National System of Interstate & Defense Highways 4 3 1956 Interstate System in Minnesota 5 4 Twin Cities Interstate System 7 5 Functional Classification of Metropolitan Highways 9 6 Average Daily Traffic, Year 2000, No -Build II 7 Average Daily Traffic, Year 2000, Build 12 8 Existing Land Use Map 15 9 Comprehensive Land Use Map 17 10 Urban Service Area 19 II Historic Alternatives - 1958 Road System 21 12 Proposed 35E Corridors 25 13 Study Area Communities 31 14 Geologic Profile 33 15 Surface Geology 34 16 Wetlands 39 17 Vegetation 45 18 Wildlife Habitat Quality 49 19 Air Quality Receptor Sites 55 20 Noise Impact Areas 59 21 Community Facilities 63 22 School Districts 67 23 Historical Archeological Sites 68 24 Open Space Map 71 25 Sensitive Human Areas 77 26 Existing Land Use Impacts 89 _ E • 1 ' 1 I 1 _ , .- " -" " WI I A E 1 1 I1 - " . • c • e .A'1 0 0 ,j.4 ' 1 1l .e s ). : -g 1 ; 111 ," ..—. 1, :•6 . , 1 7 . •.; ./ It • LA11 , IVii..r,e_i`‘-.,...•i, }..,=a...„_._•=A_A s . .; .LI.,, .,c441(!,1,2., '.m/. 1! .0. •, )N ., A'4.S...•,,, e,lj -j.1L-.6_2(114,1 ,., ...,.4% , -• tt .. 4y :',„. ..' „ ..,. '.. -, " t•. -,.... _ .-.-,-,-3(! /n',. q %V ''. , \ .A •7: , t, i" . .. ,, :- i _ !i . . ,i "j..;i..'H,,., .• 1 ;.1. 7. . .1•-"4. *1!I1 c 1 1.1• 1,;1 .( ° . 7U • ,S, • 7, ' .4• TN. ,0 „ L I a • • ' " ‘ , 9 • • t -,••• q„, . • • o tf , I W I .• 71 ° - .• 1, 1.1 \ -,•••• o - • I 14r, XES • r • C:1 —7o t I • D s's" C 0 SS A -1-"C". C01,0 COD it"S , 0 `e ^ A V Z... - A j I L \ c 0 0 LAKE SUPERIOR 1,0 I I 11 I I IEY COMOTI1 V•1111111117001 ' STUDYAFFE6-1A 11 .4 lawn 1.4114. vi 1 1 1 r • r SUMMARY SHEET FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ACTION ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT (X) Draft ( ) Final ( ) Section 4(f) Statement attached ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE PROPOSED ACTION AND ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT CAN BE OBTAINED FROM: District Engineer Minnesota Highway Department - District 9 3485 Hadley Avenue North P. 0. Box 2050 North St. Paul, Minnesota 55109 612-770-2311 Division Administrator Federal Highway Administration Suite 490, Metro Square Building St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 612-725-7001 DESCRIPTION The Proposed Federal Highway Administration Action is the participation of Federal Aid -Interstate funds in the building of 13 miles of a four to six lane freeway, designated I-35E, on new alignment through northwestern Dakota County, Minnesota. The Proposed Action would begin at its interchange with 1-35 in Burnsville, pass through the cities of Apple Valley and Eagan, and terminate near its interchange with TH 110 in Mendota Heights. The Proposed Action would require a U.S. Department of the Army, Corp of Engineers, Section 404 Permit. ALTERNATIVES This statement considers three alternatives for providing a transportation link between 1-35 and TH 110, through the Study Area. 1. Alternative Al, a design alternative of the Proposed Action that would bridge over Blackhawk Lake, a lake in central Eagan. 2. Alternative A2, a design alternative of the Proposed Action that would pass to the east of Blackhawk Lake. 3. No -build, the alternative of not building the Proposed Action. vii STATE GOVERNMENT AND MULTI -STATE RESPONSIBILITIES There would be no impact on state government as a result of any controls associated with the implementation of the Proposed Action. The Proposed Action would have no impact on adjacent states or on any multi -state responsibilities. SUMMARY OF BENEFICIAL AND ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The Proposed Action would: I. provide a more safe and more efficient transportation link than that which now exists. 2. help in the implementation of goals expressed in the comprehensive plans of all communities directly involved. 3. aid in the implementation of metropolitan goals and planning,especially in northwestern Dakota County. 4. displace 20 to 25 existing homes and 250 to 270 acres of farm lands. 5. remove 27 to 28 acres of wetland, 250 to 275 acres of deciduous trees, and several hundred acres of wildlife habitat. 6. increase the rate of urbanization of northern Dakota County and especially of the four communities through which it passes. COMMENTS ON THIS ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT HAVE BEEN REQUESTED FROM THE FOLLOWING AGENCIES AND PUBLIC GROUPS: U.S. Department of Agriculture U.S. Department of the Army Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development U.S. Department of Interior U.S. Department of Transportation Second Coast Guard District Federal Railroad Administration Federal Aviation Administration Urban Mass Transportation Administration Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Council on Environmental Quality Environmental Protection Agency Federal Energy Administration Minnesota Department of Aeronautics Minnesota Department of Economic Development Minnesota Environmental Quality Board Minnesota Historical Society Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Minnesota State Planning Agency Metropolitan Council (A-95 Clearinghouse) Metropolitan Transit Commission Metropolitan Airport Commission Metropolitan Waste Control Commission Dakota County City of Apple Valley City of Burnsville City of Eagan City of Mendota Heights viii r 1 Efc�aoN a INTRODUCTION Location Design Features Design Criteria Estimated Traffic THE FEDERAL ACTION The proposed Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) action is the participation with Federal -aid Interstate Funds in the construction of a 13-mile section of free- way designated as I-35E. The highway section under con- sideration would extend from a partially completed inter- change with 1-35 in Burnsville to an existing inter- change with Trunk Highway (TH) 110 in Mendota Heights. TH 110 is the major east -west highway of the suburban area south of St. Paul. It is a major traffic gener- ator with a current daily traffic volume of 25,000 vehicles. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION The Proposed Action is wholly within the cities of Apple Valley, Burnsville, Eagan, and Mendota Heights, all developing suburbs of the St. Paul -Minneapolis Metropolitan Area. It would be a complete access controlled freeway with service to adjacent areas, streets, and highways only at interchanges. Interchanges are proposed (from south to north) at 1-35W, County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 42, County Road (CR) 11, CSAH 23 (future TH 36), CSAH 32 (Cliff Road), CSAH 30, CSAH 31 (Pilot Knob Road), CR 28 (Yankee Doodle Road), CSAH 26 (Lone Oak Road), 1-494, and TH 110. Blackhawk Road, I38th Street, Deerwood Drive, Mendota Heights Road, and Wagon Wheel Trail would bridge over the Proposed Action, but would not have access to it. From I-35W to CSAH 23, the Proposed Action would be a basic four -lane freeway. From CSAH 23 to TH 110, it would be a six -lane freeway. The rural design would include a depressed grass -covered median to separate the roadways. The average right of way width would be 300 feet (exclusive of interchanges). The design speed would be 70 miles per hour. The maxi- mum percentage of grade would be 3 percent and the maxi mum curvature would be 3 degrees. Traffic forecasts indicate that by the year 2000, the Proposed Action would carry from 25,000 vehicles per day near its southern terminus up to 100,000 vehicles per day just south of its junction with 1-494. EXHIBIT 1 1 t 1 TWIN CITIES INTERSTATE SYSTEM HOLLM000 Completed Not Completed 5 - ' -JP - - — - ..—.�. Coon y Boundary — Flaaway or Eapwawoy MunicipM Boundary -- Ropoaod InlwNala Fwaway — — Townllup BouMwy — &W I -�- W.I. Oath TWIN CITIES METROPOLITAN AREA PURPOSE AND NEED OF THE PROPOSED ACTION Transportation Planning The impetus for the planning of the Proposed Action was a Congressional directive to the Bureau of Public Roads (now Federal Highway Administration) to plan and con- struct, in cooperation with the State Highway Depart- ments, a national system of interstate highways. The Federal Highway Act of 1956 "declared it to be essen- tial to the National interest to provide for early com- pletion of Interstate Highways as authorized and desig- nated in the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1944." Although the early need for the Interstate System empha- sized national defense, I-35E has taken on an important role in the transportation planning of the local com- munities, the region, and the state. NATIONAL SYSTEM OF INTERSTATE AND DEFENSE HIGHWAYS EXHIBIT 2 f 1 National State The National System of Interstate and Defense Highways is nearing completion. When completed, it will connect 90 percent of the nation's cities with populations of 50,000 or more. It will serve over 50 percent of the nation's urban and rural population. The system will comprise about 1.2 percent of the total mileage of all streets and highways in the United States, but will carry 20 percent of all the traffic. 1-35 from Texas to Duluth, Minnesota is nearing comple- tion. The 13 miles of this proposal and five miles in St. Paul are the only designated sections of 1-35 which are not constructed between the southern Iowa border and Duluth. 1-35 is an important link in interstate movement of people, agricultural products, livestock, commercial and industrial goods, and recreational and tourist traffic. The State Highway Department developed a "Backbone System"' of state highway routes in 1972 as a planning tool to establish priorities for future state highway needs. The 30 year program was based on a financially realistic comparison of need versus the funding ability of the State. EXHIBIT 3 MINNESOTA International Falls Moorhead Duluth Alexandria Minneapolis 1956 INTERSTATE SYSTEM Hudson Tomah lA Backbone Concept For Development of Minnesota Trunk Highways, Minnesota Highway Department, July 1972. 5 Metropolitan The basic criteria used to determine the priority of the state routes was their ability to: 1. Promote outstate economic development; 2. Satisfy travel demands on major recreational routes; 3. Serve the maximum number of highway users. In the Twin Cities metropolitan area, the backbone system was based on data developed through the Transportation Planning Program, a cooperative effort of the Minnesota Highway Department, Metro- politan Council (MC)1, Metropolitan Transit Com- mission (MTC)2, the seven counties, and the munici- palities. The Proposed Action is an integral part of the State Backbone System. The purpose of the Interstate System is to not only improve cross country movement, but also to improve movement within cities. In the Metropolitan Area, the planning envisioned serving both central cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul. Thus, 1-35 was split into two routes: I-35W to serve Minneapolis and I-35E to serve St. Paul. The balancing of transportation between the two halves of the Metropolitan Area is an important factor in the implementation of MC growth policies. The Proposed Action is consistent with the Metropoli- tan Council Principal Arterial Plan of the Transpor- tation Chapter, Metropolitan Development Guide (MDG). The MDG is the comprehensive plan for the Minneapolis - St. Paul metropolitan area prepared and adopted by the Metropolitan Council. 1 The MC, under the authority of the Minnesota Legis- lature, is the planning coordinator for the St. Paul - Minneapolis 7-county metro area. The Governor has designated it as the Metropolitan Planning Organiza- tion and as the Regional A-95 Clearing House. The MC also serves as the 3-C Planning Agency for the Metropolitan Area. 2The MTC, by authority from the Minnesota Legislature, -has responsibilities to prepare a transportation development program to implement the policy plan of the Metropolitan Council. The MTC owns and operates the metropolitan transit system. 6 a EXHIBIT 4 t 1 TWIN CITIES INTERSTATE SYSTEM Completed Not Completed —51- - -p— —« — - TWIN CITIES METROPOLITAN AREA The 1975 Session of the Minnesota Legislature directed the Metropolitan Council, with the aid of the affected cities, to reevaluate the need for completion of the Interstate System in the seven county metropolitan area. The review included an analysis of the finan- cial and social impacts of alternative Interstate routes or transit substitutes. The Council's final report to th€: Minnesota Legislature in January, 1976, urged the completion of the Proposed Action. The Metropolitan Council proposes transit usage in the proposed corridor, consisting of express buses oper- ating in mixed traffic. Busses are currently the most feasible transit alternative in the Twin City metropoli- tan area. The Proposed Action would allow preferential treatment for buses at interchanges. 7 Local The thoroughfare plans of all of the affected communi- ties and of Dakota County have concurred in the metro- politan need of a major arterial highway in the corridor of the Proposed Action. Comprehensive planning of the communities have further incorporated the corridor into their land -use development. TH 13 has occasionally been mentioned as a location for the Proposed Action. In light of the many "parallel route" controversies throughout the nation, this is a valid local concern. Regional, county, and local planning have continually emphasized the need for TH 13 as an important local access thoroughfare. The primary function of TH 13 is to fulfill adjacent land access needs and to serve the short trips. The primary function of the Proposed Act- ion is to provide access only to major local roads and to serve the longer trips. TH 13 currently fulfills both needs - the local access need and the through trip need. While it serves as the primary commuter route between the Study Areal and St. Paul, it also provides access at 30 street intersections, 23 commercial entrances, 23 residential entrances, and 16 other points. TH 13 serves a total of 92 access points between 1-35W and TH 110. Between comparable termini, the Proposed Action would provide only a total of seven access points to local streets and freeway to freeway interchanges at 1-35 and at 1-494. No other access would be allowed. Because of TH 13's role in local thoroughfare planning, it has not been considered a reasonable location for I-35E. Relationship to Total Exhibit 5 shows the relationship of the Proposed Action Transportation to the total transportation plans of the area. It also Requirements shows the relationship of the area's proposed highway transportation system to the Twin City International Airport. The Proposed Action is one of several transportation projects in the area designed to fulfill the Metropoli- tan Council arterial plans. 1-494 across northern Dakota County, I-35E in St. Paul, and the Proposed Action are the only segments of the Interstate system remaining to be completed in the southeast quadrant of the Metropolitan Area. Separate EIS's are being pre- pared for the 1-494 and the St. Paul I-35E highway sec- tions. 1The Study Area includes all of the cities of Apple Valley, Burnsville, Eagan, and Mendota Heights. For a further description, See page 30. 8 EXHIBIT 5 1 1 FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION mums Principal Arterial Minor Arterial _UI!!11VA." ii::eaia6ell,t,:61v 1 ! Fil 1 11111i1 =111!! IIl11)4r LLLl1/441111iNI Ilfif111111if1ifiiliLI 71 1r111111i a'cialrrfUlllllrlr'"""' 111111111!!■I11r awn 1114111111i11• Ffr"I+1191 mil f11[:1LLi/1 111 41;aGi:G7��L&J: W 7.ariiLiA°��1,: i='�+�'R IRFIIIi 'IIIIIICCCiC ICIffiiii �'111tTgAii;K 1i• !111IILIItl®t11L ;1111111UI 111 ---F; 11 • 111PIII11It1V iferri. SE:.i1/ 111111iiiiil a vbrl 111111111!II' I11Cf 611Eaii1 11111111111i11116 1 111��I11! Illilllll ii1111iur ►�• l.i 11Lfii11 /IJ 11N11III111 111111i1111f ±\llltt Ilff IIIIAf191 k✓tltlitltlt s IIItl1111 inimvam• NNEAPOLIS ti '1i181iuuiii14•11k r 1fl11111/111111I.. `�.r OMLiiiiiiiii1E..v� NllIELLL111111111111c %111.111.N;111111111111L ALlilaii•iiis '-'id•i(ti 9 1/IH11*11,1 11 PIRj t Hf . e11111 2,��_ itItiniIrurctri iLt 1t1IR yu►my I'.1111111 • ` '1 ik' i1 4714 14illrmull :'111 fllllllf 11111111 C" #ql lr�li• 1llliiliii VI (c, '�w,sJNR1111 111111111: Gi i"I7iaii;i �1 1`„al1 z ii4L&•Y.=t5iIi.Y iiL4u 1 IIIli111I,nT\ 11 .F dill IIIIN11111I 1111NIF1llN111r .7411ir CHFI D 1111 IEIII 1 11 irrrrrrrrrtrriiii1 MI!t irEL L!lil ilRwixr 7M.-im---iffituff 1iiA IIIAIIf iiiiiw1i1111/i//j/:; 11l 11 :1d ( 11111t]IU11# , .iI1hI ei1H11111f1F111111111•1111111 1r1111rW1 ] <P G1' L i ILM111 1111 IFF111111F11I trFNi .iii f, )fAII1I. Ir•iui iiilt1111111111111'tl1 '1/ 1iiiieliiii i 11 ii iC i l : i 07iiiiif adiiiiiiiii 511.�Li�lli�fly ii�llN1NNIkt1 1161111 � tiniT, 4 1 igi{ rl�i�l�1 11111 FI 111'11111� irl •F 111 NIIh 4 .1 - if�1 g i s 'dilliiii1111lilJ� 0 Lr1F. -. .i •'�tnNittritt! is11i11Igg G1``%Ijl1``1i�1i!I�EE��ilirr••t js{(7jliiFiiIf11ii111 11 1 ,.ii lim ffil i A _Ca�1' ` i . suuui 1 1111 I!p 'm�/-�r,1r +Jmint i1111111fi I 1. -r b nruuF[ -'. E S_ l�rr1L1!Lr% 1;4 E i1l!'r:11i* Iiiiii11`lm 1111 stegrimmir ,„...,,,... ..„. ..... 5F--e.1 ' '1" FELNI._ ra MIN SOTA- r`_ '•t'^ 1 " 1t> slim" rsr.ln.r.r....n inns .,Yr.r.r.l.,.r..r.r.+ SOURCE Metropolitan Functional Classification Plan (map) Approved By The Transportation Advisory Board on I-21-76. MINNEAPOLIS ST PAUL TERNATI, AIRPORT • PORT SNELLING NATIONAL CEMETERY Intermediate Arterial Collectors ST. PAUL EAGAN NDOTA HEIGHTS t Capacity Future Capacity Needs DEFICIENCIES OF EXISTING TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM The original intent for the Proposed Action was not to replace an existing, deficient highway. Instead, as part of the Interstate Highway System, the Proposed Action is the result of a decision to add mileage to the original system to include various large cities across the nation and the resultant split of 1-35 into an east leg and a west leg to accommodate both St. Paul and Minneapolis. The Study Area was largely rural during the early cor- ridor development and existing routes were still adequately handling needs. Urban development began in the Study Area as the Metropolitan Area grew in the 1960's. Today, the I-35W and TH 36 river crossings, the east approach to the Mendota Bridge, and over 50 percent of TH 13 from I-35W to the Mendota Bridge are at or are near capacity (Level of Servicel E or F). The majority of the remaining routes are operating at a Level of Service C or better. A small portion of CR 43 (Lexington Ave.), just south of TH 110, and a portion of CSAH 23 (Cedar Ave.), from CSAH 32 to CSAH 38 (Palomino Drive), are operating at a Level of Service D. Transportation projects are generally designed to handle traffic at a Level of Service C, 20 years beyond the completion date. The Metropolitan Planning Section of the State Highway Department, therefore, estimated Traffic volumes in the Study Area for the year 2000.2 They based their estimates on the latest population, employment, and dwelling unit projections of the Metropolitan Council. The estimates considered vehicle occupancy, trips per person, and transit useage. 'The Level of Service is a measure of traffic congestion -on a scale from A to F. Level of Service A represents free flow, little or no restrictions in maneuverability, and little or no delay. Level of Service F represents a forced flow and intolerable congestion. Levels B through D represent the transition between A and F. (Highway Capacity Manual, Highway Research Board Special Report 87, 1965, pp 78-87). 2Comprehensive Traffic Report, FAI-35E, System Planning and Analysis Report M-177, Minnesota Highway Depart- ment, April 1976. This report is available for review and copying upon request. r t t 1 1 1 1 1 me me 0. L------ Exhibit 6 shows the year 2000 existing street net- work traffic forecast without the Proposed Action. A comparison of the year 2000 traffic volumes with the year 1974 traffic volumes shows a substantial increase for the major north -south roads. Even with the planned upgrading of the north -south roads, the level of service for TH 13 and CSAH 31 (Pilot Knob Road) will probably reach Level F before year 2000. EXHIBIT 6 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC YEAR 2000 NO —BUILD ,• --I • 1 1 • IN THOUSANDS OF VEHICLES 5 4 7 7 1 1 1 1 --------------J 3 ♦i • 1 1 1 1 1 30 Exhibit 7 shows the distribution of year 2000 fore- casted traffic if the Proposed Action is added to the existing transportation network. A result of redis- tributing traffic would be the improvement of levels of service on almost all of the Study Area roads. An exception would be the drop to Level of Service E on CSAH 23, from CSAH 38 to the proposed corridor. The year 2000 level of service along the Proposed Action would be B or better, from the 35W junction to CSAH 30. North of CSAH 30 to TH 110 it would be in the Level of Service C to E range. .' EXHIBIT 7 ,1 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC YEAR 2000 BUILD a, L- ...... safety IN THOUSANDS OF VEHICLES r czy _1 Y - - - - J ........... ... Although the Proposed Action was not originally in- tended to replace an existing deficient highway, delays in implementing the proposal have resulted in the over- taxing of TH 13's ability to move traffic safely. TH 13 carries the bulk of the traffic which would be carried by the Proposed Action. INTERSECTION ACCIDENT RATES ( 1972-1974 THREE YEAR AVERAGES ) T.H. INTERSECTION AVERAGE DAILY APPROACH VOLUMES PER YEAR ACCIDENTS 4CCIDENi RATE {ACC /NILLION APPROACH VEH.) 13 NICOLLET AVE 20,000 23 3.1 13 12 th AVE / PARKWOOD 16,200 25 42 13 C.S.A.H. 32 (CLIFF RD) 22,000 37 4.7 13 CO. RD. 28 (YANKEE DOODLE) 18,300 14 2.1 13 TH 55 46,000 73 4.4 AVERAGE OF 20 HIGHEST VOLUME SIGNALIZED EXPRESSWAY INTER- SECTIONS (ST. PAUL METRO AREA) 23,800 17 1.9 1 r a 1 t t t t t t a r a 12 TABLE i t 1 Future Safety Expectations r 1 1 1 t i 3 Table 1 compares the accident rate relationship of sev- eral TH 13 interesections to the average of the 20 highest volume, signalized, expressway intersections in the St. Paul metropolitan area. The TH 13 intersection accident rates are significantly higher than the area average. Only three of the 20 intersections had acci- dent rates over 3.0. A national study found that accident, injury, and fatality rates on Interstate Highways are between 30 and 76 percent of the comparable rates on conven- tional highways, before the Interstates were opened to traffic l The experience of freeway design in the St. Paul metropolitan area substantiates these statistics. Table 2 shows that freeway accident rates in the St. Paul metropolitan area are substantially lower than the conventional highway accident rates. While highway planners cannot forecast future accident rates, the redistribution of traffic to the Proposed Action should effectively reduce accidents. TABLE 2 ST PAUL METRO AREA AVERAGE ACCIDENT RATES PER ONE MILLION VEHICLE MILES ROAD TYPE ACCIDENT RATE SEVERITY RATE I 2 LANE RURAL 2.56 5.62 2 LANE URBAN 5.91 10.82 4 LANE RURAL 2.24 4.81 4 LANE URBAN 5.01 9.95 FREEWAY (Urban & Rural) 1.96 3.49 1. SEVERITY RATE: Standard rate adjusted for severity by applying weighted factors for property damaged, personal injury and fatalities. Cedar Avenue (TH 36 and CSAH 23) also has a high acci- dent rate. A separate Environmental Impact Statement for TH 36, Report No. FHWA-Mn-EIS-74-4-F, filed with the Council on Environmental Quality on March 31, 1976 discusses the proposed upgrading of the Cedar Avenue corridor. 'Interstate System Accident Research Study #1, U.S. Department of Transportation, FHWA. t 13 Existing Land Use STATUS OF LAND USE PLANNING Comprehensive land use planning is an ongoing objec- tive of all of the Study Area communities. Dakota County is also applying land use planning on a more generalized county level, and the Metropolitan Council (MC) maintains and continuously updates a comprehensive development guide to help shape growth on the metropoli- tan level. The Metropolitan Council processes the com- munity and county plans to ensure their compatability with each other and their consistency with regional planning. Legislation in 1976 gave the MC the author- ity to enforce mandatory comprehensive planning by all communities in the 7-county metropolitan area. Some of the recent growth (within the last 5 to 10 years) may be a reflection of comprehensive development plans. Much of the existing land use in the Study Area, however, developed prior to comprehensive land use development guides. The map on the facing page shows the existing land uses. All of the Study Area communities have made and are con- tinuing to make a concerted effort to restrict develop- ment in the proposed corridor since the location public hearing in 1959. The impact of displacement of existing development by the proposal is minimal because of this effort. Land use that the Proposed Action would require is over 75 percent agricultural and open grasslands. The second highest required land use is public roads. The predom- inance of these two land uses is an indicator of the undeveloped nature of the corridor. Some of the agricultural land in the study area is actively farmed; much of it is lying idle. In either case, most of it appears to be held in the anticipation of urban development. Although not directly in the path of the Proposed Action, the most significant developed land use adja- cent to the proposal would be the residential develop- ments of Palomino Hills in Apple Valley and Ville du Parc in Burnsville. The Proposed Action would pass between the two residential areas and would impact them with noise and visual intrusion. Detailed impact evaluations are in Section III. Developers platted both residential areas with know- ledge of the proposed freeway corridor location. 14 EXHIBIT 8 L 1 EXISTING LAND USE • Residential Commercial Industrial Open Space -Parks, Recreation Open Space -School Grounds 1011 L *1 Cemeteries Undeveloped, Primarily Agricultural I-ITIGHTS /3 11 Local Comprehensive Planning Compatibility Compatability between the proposed freeway corridor and adjacent land use is an important concern of all Study Area communities since the development of their compre- hensive plans. Mendota Heights was the first Study Area community with an official comprehensive plan. Their plan, completed in 1957, was instrumental in helping to establish the location of I-35E from the Mississippi River to TH 55. Mendota Heights has not developed an updated compre- hensive plan although it has kept current its thorough- fare and open space plans which have been used during the development of this action. Burnsville prepared a comprehensive plan in 1965 and has been following it quite closely as is reflected in the existing land use. The largest single proposed land use adjacent to the Proposed Action is residential. To date, the land adjacent to the Proposed Action is generally undeveloped. Apple Valley completed a comprehensive land use plan in 1972, and Eagan completed its plan in 1974. Both plans recommend the bulk of their undeveloped lands to be residential. Apple Valley proposes a large tract of industrial land near its center and Eagan has a very large industrial park in its northern third. While residential land use is often considered incom- patible with freeways, the developers of all of the Study Area comprehensive plans recommended a consid- erable amount of residential use adjacent to the Pro- posed Action. The Burnsville plan specifically discourages only strip commercial and industrial land use along major thoroughfares. The Eagan plan, however, discourages single family dwellings adjacent to the Proposed Action and recommends only medium and high density residential development. Regardless of residential type, proper planning of the future residential property is the responsibility of the developer and the community to ensure minimal im- pact. The State Highway Department reviews proposed plats adjacent to highway rights of way and comments on their compatibility. The noise levels predicted by the State Highway Depart- ment for the Proposed Action will also be provided to the Study Area municipalities to make them aware of the future noise impacts to currently undeveloped pro- perties. The municipalities can use this information to plan development adjacent to the corridor. 16 XHIBIT 9 COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE 1 1 1 1 1 Residential Commercial Industrial Open Space -Parks, Recreation Open Space -School Grounds Cemeteries j t Regional Comprehensive Planning The Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area is responsible for the control of growth on the metropolitan level. The Development Framework Chapter of the Council's Metropolitan Development Guide serves as a guide to the local units of government on decisions affecting metropolitan systems and regional development. The Development Framework Chapter defines the Urban Service Area as that portion of the Metropolitan Area in which governmental agencies should support urban development and redevelopment. The Metropolitan Coun- cil's long range planning indicates that expansion of the Urban Service Limit should involve the following areas: Existing Urban Service Area -- This portion of the Metropolitan Area has metropolitan sewer service available, has good highway access, transit service, and most municipal services. Development and redevelopment in this well -serviced area are of high priority. Additions to the Urban Service Area, 1975- 1980 -- These areas are planned to receive metropolitan system improvements, particu- larly transportation and sewer service, during the latter half of the decade. Additions to the Urban Service Area, 1980-1990 -- These areas are contiguous to the built-up area and are the next logi- cal place for urban development to take place. They will require investment in metropolitan sewer and transit service and highway facilities as well as substantial investments in municipal and school district facilities and services. Freestanding Growth Centers -- These are small cities that have been designated as growth centers so that metropolitan in- vestments can be concentrated in a limited number of rural centers that can potentially absorb urban growth. These small cities offer a living alternative to traditional large city and suburban living as well as to scattered housing tracts in rural areas. Exhibit 10 shows the service areas as they relate to the Study Area. All of the Study Area is located within the Existing Urban Service Area. It is therefore a high priority development area recommended for urban growth by the Metropolitan Council. a 18 EXHIBIT 10 URBAN SERVICE AREA 1975 Boundary Additions 1978-1980 Additions 1981-1990 OFreestanding Growth Centers ,>..Wo. Bihowla, s Wow TWIN CITIES METROPOLITAN AREA The Study Area is one of the least developed areas still in proximity to the central cities of St. Paul and Minneapolis. One reason for the slow growth is attributed to inadequate transportation. Transporta- tion facilities will be improved considerable over the next several years, and the Proposed Action is one of several proposed projects. The Metropolitan Council has endorsed the completion of I-35E as consistant with Metropolitan Comprehensive Planning. For a more comprehensive discussion of purpose and need of the Proposed Action and the analysis of land use planning, see Transportation Planning Report For 1-35E in Dakota County, Minnesota Highway Department, April 1976. Location Public Hearing Design Public Hearing Study Documentation HISTORY OF PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND CURRENT STATUS The Purpose and Needs section discusses the National history of the Interstate System as it relates to 1-35. Once the decision to include routes through the urban centers of St. Paul and Minneapolis was made at the national level, the specific locations for the new routes became primarily a local matter. The State Highway Department established the location for 1-35E from TH 110 to West 7th Street in St. Paul after a public hearing in December, 1958. This section opened to traffic in 1966. The location public hearing for the Proposed Action was in Burnsville on August 24, 1959. The alternates to Layout #I shown in Exhibit 11 were presented. The Bureau of Public Roads (BPR-now, FHWA) approved Alternate 2 in January 1960. Alternate 2 is basic- ally the Proposed Action as described on page 2. Extensive urbanization since 1960 has eliminated Alternates I and 3 of Layout #1 from consideration as reasonable alternatives to the Proposed Action. The portion of the Proposed Action from CSAH 26 (just south of proposed 1-494) to TH 110 was designed con- currently with 1-494. FHWA authorized right of way acquisition for this portion in 1965, and it was com- pleted in 1969. A public hearing to discuss design features for the portion of I-35E from 1-35 to CSAH 26 was held on April 8, 1970, at Metcalf Junior High School in Burns- ville. The FHWA received a Design Study Report for the west portion, from 1-35 to Cedar, in July 1971. They approved the study report in November 1971. The FHWA also received an environmental re-evaluation from the State Highway Department. The FHWA approved it in August 1971. Right of way acquisition started immedi- ately after receiving all approvals. The FHWA received a combined Design Study Report and environmental re-evaluation for the portion from Cedar Avenue to CSAH 26 in December 1971. They withheld approval, however, and since the entire uncompleted highway section had not advanced to the grading and drainage stage, they determined that a full environ- mental Impact Statement was necessary to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1970. 20 a EXHIBIT 11 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1958 ROAD SYSTEM High to Medium Duty Road Low Duty Road : :Buildings Layout 1, Alt. 1 Oct. 1958 Layout 1, Alt. 2 Nov. 1958 Layout 1, Alt. 3 Nov. 1958 Current Status Future Activities The FHWA and State Highway Department jointly started the Environmental Impact Statement for the portion of I-35E through Dakota County in September 1973. All detail design of the project halted when the envir- onmental study began. Only preliminary corridor design, as necessary to aid the environmental analysis, con- tinued. The State Highway Department acquired only the right of way that the FHWA had authorized for purchase prior to August 1971, and it postponed the remainder. By December 31, 1975, 37 percent of the total right of way needed for the Proposed Action had been acquired at a cost of $3,250,000. The following dates are estimates of future activities: Location -Design Public Hearing Final EIS Design Study Report Resume R/W Acquisition Begin Construction a. TH 110 to Cedar b. Cedar to 1-35 Open to Traffic a. TH 110 to Cedar b. Cedar to 1-35 Third Quarter, 1976 Second Quarter, 1977 Second Quarter, 1977 Third Quarter, 1977 Third Quarter, 1980 Third Quarter, 1977 Second Quarter, 1983 Second Quarter, 1980 If the Action is approved as proposed, construction could start from 1-35 to Cedar Avenue. All right of way is available for the Proposed Action along this section with the exception of the property necessary for a temporary connection to Cedar Avenue. i 22 S ALTERNATIVES C"u-OnN 00 Alternative Al Alternative A2 ALTERNATIVES This statement considers three alternatives for pro- viding a transportation link between 1-35 and TH 110 through the Study Area. I) Alternative Al, a design alternative cf the Proposed Action that would bridge Blackhawk Lake. The bridge would be a three span structure that would clear the normal high water by about 15 feet. The two piers would be within the normal high water area, but the distance between them would be enough to avoid interfering with boats on the lake. 2) Alternative A2, a design alternative of the Proposed Action that would pass to the east of Black - hawk Lake. No -build 3) No -build, the alternative of not building the Proposed Action. Transit The two build alternatives are identical except for an alignment deviation from CR 32 to the intersection of CR 28 and CR 31, a distance of approximately 3.5 miles. They would both include building an Interstate Freeway on new alignment through the Study Area. The No -build Alternative would include maintaining the present highways by adding turn lanes, channelling structures, and traffic signals, by repairing shoulders, and by resurfacing roadways. These would be minimal improvements that would not change the basic character and would change only slightly the capacity of the existing highways. This statement does not consider any separate alterna- tives for mass transit. The Metropolitan Council's transportation plans do not include any separate mass transit facilities for this corridorl The Coun- cil's plans for 1990 do include express busses in mixed traffic from I-35W to TH 36. They also include express busses in mixed traffic and metered ramps with special bus access from CSAH 23 (future TH 36) to St. Paul. The design of the freeway ramps would allow them to readily incorporate the future metering and special access ramps. 'Metropolitan Transportation Development Guide --Trans- portation Plan, April 10, 1975. 24 EXHIBIT 12 PROPOSED 35E CORRIDORS -•—•— Proposed Action — Alt. Al Alt. A2 0 Interchanges Equal Consideration of Alternatives The Metropolitan Transit Commission, in a position paper to the Interstate Study Committee, stated that their plans include no more than busses in mixed traf- fic for the entire length of 1-35E through Dakota County.' The three alternatives are all under equal consider- ation. After the public hearing for this proposed action, the State Highway Department and the Federal Highway Administration will jointly select one of them. They will base the selection on the impacts that this study determines, on the comments made during the public hearing, and on the comments the various agencies and individuals make on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. 1Letter from Doug Kelm, Chairman, Metropolitan Transit Commission to the Interstate Study Committee, September 5, 1975 26 S C= t7OU(i 000 DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA AND PROBABLE IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION Regional INTRODUCTION The purpose of this section is to inventory the signif- icant environmental features and to describe the sig- nificant beneficial and detrimental environmental con- sequences of the Proposed Action. The environmental inventory considers first the under- lying physical features, then the overlying natural and ecologic features, and finally the social and economic elements of the human environment. The assessment includes both primary and secondary impacts. The primary impacts are directly caused by the Proposed Action and are the disruptions to the environment with- in the specific corridor and immediately adjacent to it. The secondary impacts are the impacts to the sur- rounding region that the Proposed Action would stimu- late or induce. Most of the material in this section was obtained from comprehensive reports prepared by an interdisciplinary team of the State Highway Department. Each report has a reference near the end of its respective subsection. The reports are available for review at the Minnesota Highway Department District 9 Headquarters, 3485 Hadley Avenue No., North St. Paul. A complete list is in Appendix A. Project Setting The St. Paul -Minneapolis Metropolitan Area is the principal population center of the state. It is the major banking, corporate, transportation, and cul- tural center, not only for Minnesota, but for the en- tire Upper Midwest area of Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, northern Iowa, and western Wisconsin. Between 1960 and 1970, the St. Paul -Minneapolis Metro- politan Area grew 23 percent. It was the third fastest growing of the 15 largest metropolitan areas in the United States. Dakota County, during the same time period, nearly doubled its population. The bulk of Dakota County's growth took place in the northwestern communities which the Proposed Action passes through. The decision to implement the Proposed Action will have impacts on the entire metropolitan area and on the state. 28 L. Most of the primary and secondary impacts, however, would occur in a relatively confined geographic area surrounding the Proposed Action. The selection of a Study Area, therefore, was made to help quantify impacts by comparing the projects potential impacts on the chosen Study Area's natural, social, and economic make-up. m.13 'puma. Susx4ry bar L J TWIN CITIES METROPOLITAN AREA L Study Area The area chosen for detailed study of the project's impacts includes the whole of the four communities that the project passes through. The communities are Mendota Heights, Fagan, Apple Valley, and Burns- ville. The Minnesota and Mississippi Rivers form the northern boundary of the Study Area. This physical barrier separates the Study Area from the cities of St. Paul and Minneapolis and has acted as a deterrent to the growth of the area. Historical population trends indicate that the Study Area did not begin a significant population gain until after 1950. From 1950 to 1960 all of the Study Area communities more than doubled their population. The entire Study Area population increased four -fold. TABLE 3 HISTORICAL POPULATION GROWTH AREA 1870 1920 1950 1960 1970 1975 APPLE VALLEY 216 361 377 5,143 8,502 15,315 BURNSVILLE 361 419 583 2,716 19,940 31,274 EAGAN 670 857 1,185 3,381 10,398 17,686 MENDOTA HEIGHTS 444 757 2,107 5,028 6,168 7,258 STUDY AREA TOTALS 1,691 2,394 4,252 16,268 45,008 71,533 METRO AREA TOTALS 109,340 759,518 1,185,694 1,523,956 1,874,380 2,031,000 'SOURCE, U.S. BUREAU OF CENSUS From 1960 to 1970, the Study Area population again grew 400 percent. The 1975 population estimate indicates that this growth trend is continuing. TABLE 4 FUTURE POPULATION GROWTH' AREA 1970 1975 1980 1990 2000 APPLE VALLEY 8,502 15,315 22,750 39,650 55,000 BURNSVILLE 19,940 31,274 41,000 63,400 76,000 EAGAN 10,398 17,686 28,900 52,200 75,200 MENDOTA HEIGHTS 6,168 7,258 9,700 14,500 20,100 STUDY AREA TOTALS 45,008 71,533 101,305 169,750 226,300 METRO AREA TOTALS 1,874,380 2,031,000 2,195,000 2,560,000 2,888,000 SOURCE : METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ESTIMATES 0 EXHIBIT 13 STUDY AREA COMMUNITIES MENDOTA HEIGHTS APPLE VALLEY —Municipal Boundary EAGAN BURNSVILLE ---County Boundary 11111111 P 0•iiii1111RM1rfrIu41111111111111111A1! 11A11Il. `,410410I V ZC■=��r� I" d, rPrG 1111U111I'U/.1rLLLN111111r1F111iIIILLIIIIIE9■i�iiiiEEIL ,?iiIli " ��. Ir � t' 11IRlorrn11111wr,�1..i rrrr.l[u1AT : 111A11111P1■11 I .� AuuIuIi 1u1�� � , aST. PAUL � 0�ION r +r1Et1'rrnM1u11I11liu•Errrbuu-Agri�LE.CLELLL`r^'-I" IPI A11ul.1111111.\ a, i. �. ro emee111111iuMpi1pN1� liill_A.4i0/9 ri��'" „111$1. i /oriAllll.�.1'111111111A.A '��; ��= 4:p !!![!!lLECSGi11C55 ifi5i ��11g1����` r�' IA1114LLLLRLLIL / dLLLU4ULUU6LL961� IU` ► LLRIIIIIIIIPIM i�,- .., � iiii�ii�iiirl q, �I1r aii l�l�' j% i�iAIIII• : 11Riea�\\ it �t+ -�11� x Il!F 1 I E� .�n 1nu1r+ I :aim MINNEAPOLIS Llint 111 ,1.41,1111ALL1ULL1r'►.UULLIUUWu�'+,- 11NlIIIA I 11111111' i "luIIIA11F4 „11r!LLIAII r'f IA1m1II11 _ fl'� ``^^ �® millifu■r rim! �111rr/furor ei GI i (Lr 11I LULI-L� .,Etta I on GAI_, f � j� Illl111111y1� Mlr,� rAr[ "" l••. Sss llllrllrrllrEl4t�IFr� I�� , �MILIIIIII�.,� 1 I. .� �' !!1l1rE�rtY1�1 j 11 s ■�■u1t AIW11111111111►: l IIIIPP N.% 11P111MhiiR1 LI r11111 111MI 1111I1 1 1� IEA •� ` . k` �1 / Y pr tom AM1fIW1 !IIpI , 6n,4111![11111MJI-I11111o111_rrr41' �••, ` iiiiiiiiikliiluI J/ sal o 11111111114111111ii111i1111 _ 111111111nT► !II) `. 1:n 1 11111r1A11li1 M.INEAPOus I �� ,, 11111111P111111 Rem r 1111 16EEI rr' ER PT . RICHFIELD = TAIRPORT I `, �'/ i AltNEUErrrrerriiiii fill Ern Ulu) lip'""mmiiIIIII� �' �� A1IIUM-A11111 11111uul11P 111� �• I '�, �! 11111111111M C: .11111 `1111rui iri11111111�,' 1111 = ' I 111W1 Pr'LLSLL p 61.111111111111F111111 1■1! 1 [1I11[1I I I .:1•IAAMAl� it■lu!1111rrri irrrrui-i ii e r•11!m11IIr IEI4E111 f■1■11NA111111111111111t 1 et1LLL1 ' I�Illlllil w �� �TROP rs hill alrE' �1 1A:li11111111111 1■ii �L�rr4.�� f.LC""�IIL� nlreurnn�1Cry66rZrG[ll IIII11111a k,�ie ii i1�SS111�i(,A1111111si Aire! rim-IA*011A " BLOOMINGTON1l11IlIIIIlr4E �a, ...e c,ii&�lli'uiuuil 1Vl::iErrr1111! �n�s1i '1 r► L'®IIIIUiiiiiiii E1pTk�t IfrIp.Ifrrr.I � ���v 1111eArfrA 11114F1.11112.7 '� (_imma�' inipice 119 lll1 �IEE1111! Al 14VEr�`� trillrillagglialler_/F��g�[fF�� l'.1Ri lq I. 1111R I:EE�LF/ Y,. � i/ • _ 'ALA I"' e i lr` irefiA11A�4I jI / %� j6 ��' �■ ' EAGAN ���� 1.4diEnia . fir.• : �` ` �,%1 IpMEIIEEEh�1:. iral 'r rliit� EttYI®Iale .• ' lti`A� E • ��'ret FORT SNEWNG NATIONAL CEMETERY BURNSV!LL APPLE VA SOCK NDOTA GEOLOGY Bedrock At the base of the bedrock is a 5Z mile thick layer of volcanic rock. On top of the volcanic rock are sever- al hundred feet of varying layers of sandstones, shales, and limestones. The layers vary from a few inches to over 100 feet thick (Exhibit 14). The bedrock is a part of the metropolitan area syncline, a downfold or trough in the rock layers. The low point of this syncline is generally on an east -west line through the University of Minnesota, north of the Study Area. All of the rock layers in the Study Area down - slope to the north at about 20 feet per mile. The bedrock forms a solid, stable base under the Study Area. It has no active faults, and earth movement is not a problem. The Proposed Action would not cut into the bedrock and would not have an impact on it. The No -build Alternative would not have any impact on the bedrock. 32 1100 GEOLOGIC PROFILE I 35E (ALTERNATE I ) BEGINING OF PROPOSED ACTION 1000 35 W 900 Imo Yti 9!or; ;! 700 600 500 .' 1000 900 600 w 700 600 500 PRIMARILY SANDY LOAM TILL R CLAY LOAM TILL MIXED WITH SANDY LOAM 8 LOAMY SAND. CSAH 42 0 CSAH 30 OTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE OF THE JORDAN SANDSTONE (TWIN CITIES AOUIFERI SCALE: ,!ORDAN SAND'` CR St PROPOSED 494 0 0 CSAH 30 E VTIOMETRIC SURFACE OF THE ,RDAN SANDSTONE sh„ _ '_ 1000 /00 y — 600 A. LA O END OF PROPOSED ACTION [ORATION PRIMARILY SANDY LOAM TILL a CLAY LOAM TILL MIXED WITH SANDY LOAM 8 LOAMY SAND WAGON WHEEL TRAIL . G_ENW00D SHALE INFLAME PAVEMENT 500 900 800 �aii�Je4 i?�,!4N1N�r `fie- 700 ST PETER SANDSTONE .. .. . 600 �RRmsMMII innn”___�a ti --mow ��OMI = �_�_=liM MI =M� __ •• ••sue•••• •• ems•• 0 O 0 0 0 EXHIBIT 15 SURFACE GEOLOGY RIVER FLOOD PLAIN TERMINAL MORAINE OUTWASH SAND AND GRAVEL ism flP/Wirt, � ��.�s•. ° River Flood Plain Outwash Plain Topography and Soils The glaciers of the last two million years formed the topography of the Study Area. They left an accumu- lation of glacial drift (rock debris) from 100 to 500 feet thick. The glaciers formed three striking, and different, natural feature areas. The northwestern part of the Study Area is a river flood plain; the southern part is a glacial outwash plain; the central part is a band of hills and ponds, a glacial terminal moraine. As we shall see later, the effects of the glaciers continue to this day. The flood plain of the Minnesota River is a broad, flat valley. The Minnesota River is an underf i t river, that is, it is too small for the size of its valley. In- stead of eroding the valley, it tends to fill it in with silt and muck. The deposit in the flood plain is now about 100 feet thick. The flood plain is an area of farms swamps, flood plain lakes, separated oxbow lakes, and woods. It is generally undeveloped, but it does have some in- dustrial development. The Proposed Action parallels the river flood plain and is approximately IZ miles away. Neither the Pro- posed Action nor the No -build Alternative would impact it. The outwash plain is characterized by long rolling hills with gentle slopes. It has a moderately devel- oped drainage pattern. The texture of the outwash plain is generally uniform. The material is sand and fine gravel with some silt and clay. Boulders are not common. The stable, well drained subsoils of the outwash plain make it a highly desire - able area for development. The Proposed Action would cross only a finger of the outwash plain in central Eagan and would have no sig- nificant impact on it. 35 Terminal Moraine The terminal moraine roughly parallels the Minnesota River Valley. The moraine is an area of unsorted material (till) piled up into short, steep hills with ponds and potholes in between. It has an immature drainage pattern. The material is generally clayey with frequent boulders and pockets of sand and gravel. The Proposed Action would lie almost entirely in the terminal moraine. The problems associated with the slopes, the poor drainage, and the clayey soils of the moraine would make construction through the area less than desirable. Moving the highway alignment to another location within the Study Area would not re- lieve these problems. They would not be insurmount- able, however, and current design and construction techniques would significantly reduce the impact. For a further discussion of the geology of the Study Area, see Bedrock and Glacial Geology, Interstate 35E, Northern Dakota County, Minnesota Highway Department 1976. 36 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 f Near -Surface Water Table WATER RESOURCES Ground Waters The Study Area contains two major levels of ground waters (see Geologic Profile, page 33). The upper level is the near -surface water table. The near -surface water table generally follows, in a modified way, the contour of the land surface. The lakes and swamps of the Study Area often indicate its surfacing above the land. It may rise or fall according to the seasonal or annual variations of precipitation. The Jordan The lower level of ground water is the Jordan aquifer Acquifer (water bearing rock or soil). The aquifer is contained in the Jordan sandstone layer which lies under 500 to 600 feet of sedimentary rock and glacial drift. It is a major source of municipal water in the Twin City Metro- politan Area. Perched Water Watershed Characteristics In addition to the two major water levels, the soils of the Study Area contain impermeable layers which hold up limited areas of perched water. The perched water tables are not directly connected to the near - surface water table, but they, too, might be under- ground or might surface as a pond or swamp. Perched water might also flucuate with seasonal precipitation. Surface Waters Except for the Minnesota River, no well defined water courses are in the Study Area. Lakes, ponds, and swamps occupy the low areas of the rolling topography. Individual watersheds are quite small. Runoff is currently contained within the individual watersheds. Eventually, proposed storm sewer devel- opment by the Study Area communities will connect the numerous watersheds with outlets into the Minnesota or Mississippi Rivers and into some of the larger Study Area lakes. Wetlands The wetlands of the Study Area consist mainly of lakes, marshes, swamps, wet meadows, potholes, sloughs, and river bottoms. These wetlands form a part of the regional ecosystem and provide valuable habitat for waterfowl, furbearers, 37 Wetland Removal small mammals, and a myriad of aquatic species. Wet- lands not only serve wildlife, but they also provide an essential link in the water cycle. They contribute to the recharge of the near -surface water table and thus contribute to the ecological stability of the area. Exhibit 16 catalogues all wetlands of the Study Area according to the definitions of the U.S. Fish and Wild- life Service Circular 39 (1971). The Fish Lake desig- nations are from the Minnesota Department of Conserva- tion (now MDNR), Division of Game and Fish, Special Publication No. 45 (1967), "Metropolitan Lake Inven- tory". Impacts to Water Resources The most direct impact to water resources would be the filling or bridging of wetlands. Table 5 gives a com- parison of wetland types impacted by the two design alternatives. The actual acres which would be filled cannot be determined at this preliminary stage. The table, therefore, lists the total acres of wetlands within the right of way, all of which would not be eliminated. TABLE 5 Alternate Al Alternate A2 Wetland Type (acres) (acres) Type 2 Marsh 20 21 Type 3 Marsh 4 4 Type 4 Harsh 2 0 Type 5 Marsh 2 2 Fish Lakes 0 0 Total 28 27 The difference between the impacts of Alternative Al and Alternative A2 is not significant. The removal of approximately 28 acres of wetlands by the Proposed Action accounts for 2 percent of the total acreage of the corridor. Dakota County contains approximately 16,000 acres of wetlands, about 4 percent of its total area. The Study Area contains over 2,300 acres of wetlands, also about 4 percent of its total area. 38 EXHIBIT 16 WET LANDS :.- Intermittent Streams 1 Type 2 Inland Fresh Meadows Type 3 Inland Shallow Fresh Marsh Type 4 Inland Deep Fresh Marsh Type 5 Inland Open Fresh Water (marginal fish lake) Fish Lakes (351\ E2 Highway Highway drainage design is based on two basic principles: Drainage to perpetuate flows across the highway right of way and to keep to a minimum the diversion of runoff from one watershed to another. Initially, the Proposed Action would have ponding in watersheds adjacent to the road- way. Many of these ponds would eventually be provided with outlets into the Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers and the larger Study Area Lakes as a result of munici- pal storm sewer construction. Erosion/ Sedimentation Because of the morainic soils, surface and subsurface drainage requirements would be extensive. The presence of many perched water tables makes the extent of subsurface drainage needs uncertain until actual con- struction. Dewatering of perched water would be a local impact and would not impact the overall groundwater levels. The State Highway Department's soils investigation unit is investigating an area of potential impact. At a point 400 feet south of Rogers Lake (Mendota Heights) the Proposed Action cuts below the lake surface water level. The investigation will help determine whether the lake is a perched water body or an expression of the near - surface water table. An understanding of the geologic characteristics of the lake will help determine the the design and construction techniques necessary to avoid impact, if any, to the lake or to the subsurface water of the area. Sedimentation caused by erosion is a potential impact of the Proposed Action. Sedimentation can cover and eliminate plant growth, cause high turbidity in water supplies, settle out in ponding areas and reduce their storage volume, and restrict groundwater recharge. Sedimentation can impact all wetlands adjacent to con- struction activities. Several protective measures are available to reduce this potential. Wood fiber mats, mulches, special seed mixtures, berms, dikes, slope drains, special ponding areas, and sedimentation basins reduce erosion during construction. Borrow pits outside of the construction corridor would be treated for erosion control. Restoration would in- clude cleaning shaping, replacement of topsoil and re- establishing vegetation. The type and placement of erosion control measures would be partially developed during detail planning and would continue to be developed throughout the con- struction phase. The contractor and construction en- gineer would cooperate throughout the construction phase 40 Salts - Surface Waters Private Water Supplies to implement erosion control practices. Proper appli- cation of erosion control procedures would limit sedi- mentation to near natural conditions. Drainage into ponds and lakes would contain varying amounts of chemical pollutants. The most common chemical pollutant from highway runoff and the easiest to estimate are the chloride compounds used in deicing operations. Average annual concentrations of chlorides exceeding 500 mg/I would occur in approximately 15 of 45 ponding areas required for stormwater runoff. The 15 ponding areas would have high concentrations because runoff would be almost totally highway originated and the watershed would be too small (less than 35 acres) to allow greater dilution. The concentrations in ponding areas of the larger watersheds and the concentrations in the area's lakes would be minimal. The ponding area salt concentrations would not be high enough to significantly impact wildlife. Aquatic plants intolerant of high salt levels, however, would eventu- ally be replaced by plants with higher tolerance levels. Salt concentrations in lakes and ponding areas have the potential for polluting the groundwater tables. Near -surface groundwater pollution is unlikely to occur in shallow wells beyond 75 feet from the highway, how- ever, because of the filtering action of the soil. A survey of shallow wells along the Proposed Action in- dicated that no wells are within 200 feet of the corri- dor. Public Water The use of municipal water supplies will soon eliminate Supplies the need for shallow wells. The Study Area communities all obtain their water from the Jordan Sandstone for- mation of the Twin City Artesian Basin. During the development of this project the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) raised the question of possible contamination of the Jordan for- mation via Blackhawk Lake due to a window in the Dolo- mite cap of the Jordan formation (Exhibit 14, page 33). Consultation with the DNR and the U.S. Geological sur- vey determined that pollution of the Jordan formation was highly unlikely since it appears that groundwater is escaping through the window rather than recharging. The Proposed Action, therefore, should not have any impact to public water supplies. Efforts to Minimize Impacts of Salts There are now no economical alternatives to deicing chemicals. To limit the amount of deicing chemicals appearing in the runoff, the State Highway Department uses the minimum amount of chemicals necessary to in- sure safe operation of the roadway. To insure mini- mum usage, truck spreaders are calibrated periodically and individual truck salt application rates are re- corded for each segment of roadway. The State High- way Department uses sand, sodium chloride, and calcium chloride in the deicing mixture. The percentage of each constituent in the deicing mixture depends on roadway condition, temperature, and type of storm. The sand is stockpiled with an average of 5 percent sodium chloride to prevent freezing and this mixture is adequate for use during less severe storms. For more severe storm conditions, additional sodium chloride and calcium chloride are added to the sand. The following standard policies further minimize harm from deicing salts: 1. When precipitation begins, under certain atmospheric conditions, the application of deicing chemicals will prevent the bonding of snow and ice to the pavement surface. Much less salt is then needed to obtain a dry pavement. 2. Efforts have been made and will continue to be made to find ways of reducing the amount of salt used to keep our highways safe for winter driving conditions. A salt monitoring and reduction pro- gram has decreased salt usage by 42 percent based on a five-year average. Further reduction has been accomplished by using more efficient mixing and spreading methods. The quantity of salt required can also be reduced by using a combination of CaCI and NaCI (Calcium and Sodium Chloride). This com- bination will also decrease the potential for en- vironmental damage. 3. Salt and salt -sand stockpiles will be covered and kept away from ponds, wells, water supplies, and drainage ways. For a more comprehensive analysis of water resources, see Ground Water Data for Environmental Impact State- ment, 1-35E, October 1975, and Preliminary Hydraulics and Water Quality Analysis, 1-35E, April 1976, Minne- sota Highway Department. 42 Chemical and Oil Spills Section 404 Permit The pollution from chemical and oil spills would pro- bably be local and would not contaminate water resources near the Proposed Action. The State Highway Department's procedure in case of oil or chemical spills is to first contain the spill by placing a sand ditch block on the downstream side of the spill. If possible, highway maintenance forces remove the spilled material by pumping or sponging. If it is not possible to re- move the material before it soaks into the soil, the maintenance forces remove the contaminated soil, haul it to an appropriate dump, and replace it with clean soil. The State Highway Department's maintenance forces automatically call the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) in any accident involving oil or chemical spills. The MPCA monitors the clean up and the impacts. In addition to State and local permits, the Proposed Action will require a Section 404 permit from the Corp of Engineers. This permit is required for all projects that require fill material to be placed into navigable waters, contiguous wetlands,or water bodies five acres or larger. The Proposed Action would require fill in a waterbody larger than five acres. Description Impacts VEGETATION The major vegetation types of the Study Area are mixed - oak, mixed -hardwoods, sedge willow, and mixed grasses. The mixed -oak type consists primarily of bur, red, and white oaks. The mixed -hardwoods type consists primar- ily of elm, green ash, boxelder, aspen, and cottonwood. The mixed -oaks and mixed -hardwoods generally support the same understory. The mixed -grasses type includes a wide variety of grasses and non -woody vegetation that is generally in idle farmlands, pasturelands, and cultivated lands. Generally, the sedge -willow type is in the river flood plain, the mixed oak and mixed -hardwood types are in the morainic areas, and the mixed -grasses type is in the outwash plain (see Glacial Geology map, page 34). Near the intersection of CSAH 42 and 1-35 is a prairie meadow remnant that is apparently unique to the Study Area.1 The Proposed Action would pass within 200 feet of it (see area G, Exhibit 17). The major impacts to vegetation would be the direct removal of the vegetation during construction. Table 6 page 46, shows the acreages of vegetation types within the corridors of the two build alternatives. These acreages, however, are probably generous. The actual construction limits are generally well within the right of way. - - - - - - - - - - - - 1This unique feature was brought to the attention of the State Highway Department by Donald B. Vogtman, Consulting Biologist for Brauer and Associates. Brauer and Associates are the planning consultants for the Ridges medical complex. 44 EXHIBIT 17 VEGETATION Grassland Sedge - Willow Light Density Mixed Hardwoods Dense Mixed Hardwoods Light Density Mixed Oak Dense Mixed Oak GHTS ra5 2000 The mixed -oak and mixed -hardwood areas are a remnant of the hardwood forests of southeastern Minnesota that until 1850 covered most of the Study Area and the northern third of Dakota County. Farming and urbaniza- tion, however, have reduced the hardwood forest to about 9,000 acres which are scattered throughout the Study Area. The Proposed Action would impact the re- maining acres of hardwood forest by removing approxi- mately 275 acres of woodlands along Alternative Al and 260 acres along Alternative A2. Woodlands cover the Study Area to such an extent that movement of the alignment to avoid impacting them is not feasible. TABLE 6 VEGETATION IMPACTS Land Class Alternative Al Alternative A2 Mixed -grasses 437 426 Agricultural 249 270 Mixed -oak 173 170 Mixed -hardwoods 104 88 Wetlands 27 28 Urbanized 143 156 Total 1133 1138 The corridor of the Proposed Action would cut through the wooded areas and would expose the trees along the edges of the corridor to wind pressure to which they are not accustomed. Some of these trees, particularly the young or the overly mature would be lost from wind - throw. The highway construction could also change the amount of moisture in the soil of the areas adjacent to the corridor. The rise or fall of moisture could kill some of the trees near the corridor. In dense mixed -hardwood stands, removing the forest canopy trees during construction would increase the amount of sunlight available to the natural understory vegetation. The increased sunlight would generate a gradual shift in the vegetation to more light -tolerant species and would increase the density of the understory 46 Efforts to Minimize Harm along the edge of the corridor. The increased edge vege- tation would provide more food and cover and would pro- bably attract more birds and small mammals than a dense forest canopy would. Salt used for snow removal could impact the adjacent vegetation. The heaviest salt concentrations and therefore the most impacts would be from 10 to 30 feet from the edge of the roadway pavement. Right of Way limits, however, would extend beyond 30 feet from the roadway edge, and most impacts would be confined to the corridor. The landscaping of the corridor would include salt -tolerant species (see landscaping concept, page 79). Adjacent to the corridor, the vegetation would gradually shift to more tolerant species. As the distance from the corridor increases, the impact would rapidly diminish. Seven areas are especially critical, and the construc- tion plans would include provisions to protect them (see Exhibit 17). These areas are: A) West shoreline of Rogers Lake B) East shoreline of Lemay Lake C) Blackhawk Lake area D) Area of dense mixed -hardwoods between Blackhawk Lake and Deerwood Drive E) Pitt Lake area at the junction of Galaxie Avenue and Cliff Road F) Wooded area around Palomino Hills -Ville du Parc residential areas G) Prairie meadow remnant near CSAH 42. Construction operations would disturb only those areas specifically required for the construction of the Pro- posed Action. The rest of the area within the right of way would be left undisturbed. A physical barrier, a snow fence or wire netting, would protect those areas that are especially critical. Where possible, the barrier would be far enough from any trees to prevent root damage from compaction of the soil or from physical damage. Where it is not possible to present root damage, the trees would be pruned to balance the aboveground mass with the root mass. The contractor would be liable for any unavoidable damage to the vegetation and especially to any trees. For a further discussion of the impacts to vegetation, see Vegetation, Surface Water, & Wildlife Review of Proposed I-35E Through Eagan, Mendota Heights, Burns ville and Apple Valley, Minnesota Highway Department. Sept. 1975, pp. 10-19. 47 Habitat Mammals Birds Fish WILDLIFE The necessary requirements of food, water, shelter, and reproduction areas make up the basic habitat requirements to sustain wildlife. The Study Area con- tains substantial amounts of habitat of varying quali- ties to sustain a great variety of wildlife. The value of habitat to wildlife is closely related to the type and quality of vegetation. The quality of vegetation is in turn dependent on soil fertility, water availability, and the extent of development. Exhibit 18 shows the habitat quality in the Study Area. The Minnesota River Valley provides the most sig- nificant quality and quantity of wildlife habitat within the Study Area. If an animal's range extends into this part of Minnesota, it is very likely that the animal will be in the valley. The only species of large mammals in the Study Area is the white-tailed deer. A sizeable population of deer live within the Minnesota River Valley. The deer range, however, into the nearby upland hardwoods in the areas where food and cover are available. The more common species of small mammals in the Study Area are squirrels, rabbits, muskrats, raccoons, skunks, woodchucks, fox, weasel, and several members of the mice and vole families. Beaver, badger, and mink are not as abundant. The Study Area supports a wide variety of upland birds, songbirds, shore birds, raptors, and water- fowl. The most common upland bird is the pheasant. Common shorebirds include herons, bitterns, plover, rails, snipe, sandpipers, and blackbirds. The great egret is extending its range into the Study Area. The Study Area contains a great variety of songbirds. The common raptors include the red-tailed hawk, broad - winged hawk, sparrow hawk, and great horned owl. Waterfowl are abundant in the river valley and in the numerous marshlands of the northern half of the Study Areal, The more common species are mallards, blue - winged teal, wood -ducks, and American coot. Fish Lake, Crystal Lake, Bald Lake, and Holland Lake are the only lakes within the Study Area that the MDNR classifies as fish lakes. 48 EXHIBIT 18 WILDLIFE HABITAT QUALITY Very Low Low J Medium High Very High Impacts Crystal Lake was reclaimed with fish toxicants in 1965 and was stocked with northern pike, bass, crappies, and bluegills. Very little information is available on the other three lakes. They seem, how- ever, to support a good bass and panfish population. MDNR classifies Alimagnet Lake as a marginal fish lake. Private landowners, a local sportsman's club, and the Department of Natural Resources have cooperated to stock the lake with northern pike. Bullheads are also abundant. The Study Area does not contain any threatened or en- dangered animal species. Direct and immediate impacts on wildlife would be the loss of habitat. Since plant and animal species exist together in a rather delicate balance, alteration of the habitat would produce corresponding changes in the wildlife populations. The degree of change is dependent upon the amount and value of the vegetation affected and the dependency of wildlife on that vege- tation. Table 7 catalogues the wildlife habitat and representative wildlife directly impacted within the corridors of the Proposed Action. The loss of habi- tat to highway construction within the Study Area would not seriously impact the population of any species. TABLE 7 WILDLIFE HABITAT SYNOPSIS Interdependent Habitat Habitat Most Common Tolerance to Alternative Al Alternative A2 Value Relationships Species Development (acres) (acres) Very High Lakes, meadows, rivers. wetlands, woodlands Fish, ducks, herons, egrets, raptors, pheasants, grouse, rabbits, squirrels, raccoon, deer, furbearers, songbirds Very low 37 0 High Wetlands, woodlands, grasslands, farmlands Pheasants, grouse, rabbits, squirrels, raccoon, songbirds, waterfowl, raptors, furbearers Low 292 317 Medium Farmlands, grasslands, woodlands Pheasants, grouse, rabbits, squirrels, raccoon, rodents, raptors, songbirds Medium 409 435 Low Farmlands, grasslands Pheasant, grouse, rabbits, squirrels, raccoon, songbirds, rodents High 343 331 Very Law Urban Forest (residen- till, industrial) Pheasants, grouse, rabbits, squirrels, raccoon, rodents, pigeons, sparrows, starlings, songbirds Very High 50 50 Totals 1131 1133 (1) See Exhibit , Page 50 Efforts to Minimize Harm The Proposed Action would interfere with present ani- mal movement patterns and would probably cause some animal deaths. A check of auto- deer collisions re- corded by the Department of Natural Resources within the Study Area showed 60 auto -killed deer in 1973 and 64 in 1974. Several locations had a high incidence of deer -auto collisions. These locations are within linear vegetation bands extending from the Minnesota River Valley to various woodlots and agricultural fields within the Study Area. Deer tend to follow these vegetational bands in their movements between the river valley and other portions of the Study Area. The Proposed Action bisects some of these bands, so the possibility of deer auto collisions does exist. Movement patterns of small animals would also be hampered. As time passes, animal populations would adjust to the severance and the number of highway kills would reduce. This adjustment usually takes three to four years. Fencing along the highway would totally sever the movement of many intermediate sized animals. The efforts to minimize harm to wildlife would con- sist mainly in conserving or in reestablishing the wildlife habitat. Construction activities would only disturb the vegetational areas, and therefore the habi- tat areas, required for construction of the Proposed Action. The disturbed areas would receive revegetation. One of the criteria used in the selection of grasses and shrubs for revegetation would be their usefulness for food and cover for songbirds and small animals. Maintenance practices followed after construction are also important. By request of the Minnesota Depart- ment of Natural Resources, mowing of roadside ditches is delayed until after the pheasant nesting season. As a result of this practice, roadside ditches have become an important part of the reproduction habitant of the pheasant. See also Vegetation, page 44, and Water Resources, page 37. For a more comprehensive analysis of wildlife, see Vegetation, Surface Water & Wildlife Review, Minnesota Highway Department, September 1975, pp. 20-38. 51 Fertilizers Insecticides and Fungicides CHEMICAL CONTROLS The construction plans would include commercial, granular fertilizer for establishing the ground cover disturbed by construction. These granular fertilizers are mixtures of compounds of nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium. They do not include any urea, gaseous, or liquid fertilizers. On new con- struction projects, an analysis of the topsoil for fertility, texture, and PH determines the type and application rate of fertilizer. The fertilizer which heavy moisture leaches out is generally an excess of what the soil and plant life can use. The matching of fertilizer quantity to soil deficiencies minimizes leaching of fertilizers into ground waters, and the amount of leaching should be insignificant. Mulching further limits or mini- mizes movement, through leaching, into ground waters. Fertilizer which is matched to the topsoil promotes the establishment of a dense, vigorous turf in a minimum of time after construction activities expose the soils. Fertilizer minimizes erosion and thus sedimentation into waters, and it conserves moisture for plant use. Highway fertilizers do not seem to be a significant contaminant of natural waters, but they do provide a positive impact by preventing erosion and sedi- mentation. Insecticides and pesticides would be used only in specific areas where infected trees are a danger to neighboring trees. These chemicals are a potential hazard to the environment, but they are effective where no other method of insect or fungus control has proven effective, and avoiding their use could present a much greater danger. Their use along highways is rare. The State Highway Department has a representative on the Minnesota Environmental Quality Council Task Force which conducts an ongoing review of pesticide usage. 52 Herbicides Highway maintenance operations use spot spraying of herbicides in specific problem areas to kill noxious weeds and brush growing within the safety clear zone (30 feet from edge of pavement). The rest of the right of way remains untreated. A combination of an antidrift emulsion, an invert sprayer,and using low wind velocity days minimizes wind drift. A herbicide -asphalt mixture eliminates all plant growth in areas that cannot be readily mowed such as around guardrails. Herbicides are a hazard to plant growth beyond the treated area, and the stickiness of the asphalt prevents the spread of the herbicide by runoff. The asphalt also prevents erosion of the soil. The benefits of herbicides include maintenance of roadside beauty, more effective erosion control (grasses grow more readily after removal of noxious weeds, and reduction of accident potential involving wildlife by removal of tall weeds and brush along- side the roadway. 53 Analysis Standards Predicted CO Levels AIR QUALITY The State Highway Department conducted an air quality analysis for the Proposed Action to determine its con- sistency with the State's air quality implementation plan and with the Federal air quality guidelines. The air quality analysis followed the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's "Guidelines for Air Quality Main- tenance planning and analysis, Volume 9: Evaluating Indirect Sources." The analysis estimated pollution concentrations contributed by the traffic forecasted to use the corridor. The traffic generated pollutants added to the anticipated background concentrations indi- cates the total future concentrations of pollutants. The only pollutant the analysis studied in detail was carbon monoxide (CO) because it is the only transpor- tation related Priority 1 pollutant in the Minneapolis - St. Paul Air Quality Control Region. CO is relatively inert and estimates of its concentra- tions from motor vehicles are reliable. The State air quality implementation plan, administered by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, has standards for maximum CO concentrations of 30 parts per million (ppm) for a one hour period and 9 ppm for an eight hour average. Federal standards for CO concentrations, en- forced by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, are a maximum of 35 ppm for a one hour period and 9 ppm for an eight hour average. Predicted levels of pollutants are estimates for worst case traffic and weather conditions. Under these con- ditions, the following forecasts are for two represen- tative locations along the Proposed Action corridor and for one location along TH 13. TABLE 8 CO CONCENTRATIONS'(ppm) FOR PEAK HOUR AND HIGH 8 HOUR AVERAGES STANDARDS RECEPTOR ALTERNATE 1975 1980 19832 1990 2000 STATE FEDERAL 8hr Ihr 8hr Ihr 8hr Ihr 8hr Ihr 8hr Ihr 8hr Ihr 8hr Ihr 1 PROPOSED ACTION - - _ _ - - - 0.5 15 9.0 30.0 9 0 35.0 NO BUILD 2.7 7.5 1.0 2.9 -1.2 - 2.9 0.5 2.9 9.0 30.0 9.0 35.0 2 PROPOSED ACTION - 0.9 2.2 0.6 1.4 0.6 15 9.0 30.0 9.0 35.0 NO BUILD = - - - 0.7 1.7 0.4 1.0 0.4 1.0 9.0 30.0 9.0 35.0 3 PROPOSED ACTION - - 1.3 4.1 0.9 2.6 1.1 3.6 9.0 30.0 9.0 35.0 NO BUILD - - - - 0.7 1.7 0.4 1.0 0.4 1.0 9.0 30.0 9.0 35.0 I Concentrations = Ambient + T off lc Generoted. 2'1983= I Yeor After Estimated Opening 0f Proposol. 54 EXHIBIT 19 AIR POLLUTION RECEPTOR SITES • Air Quality Report Because of the insignificant values obtained for the years shown in the table, no interim years concentra- tions were forecasted. The analysis demonstrates that the maximum CO concen- trations at the receptor sites will be within the Minnesota and Federal ambient air quality standards. The air quality study also forecasts that the 1985 vehicle pollutants in the St. Paul Central Business District (CBD) would be below the 1975 levels and would be significantly below the prescribed standards. The Proposed Action would be a minimum of eight miles from the St. Paul CBD. Traffic forecasts show that only 7 percent of the vehicles on the Proposed Action, south of proposed 1-494, would go to the St. Paul CBD. Traffic to the Minneapolis CBD would be approximately 3 percent. Based on the findings of the air quality study, it is the opinion of the FHWA and the State Highway Depart- ment that the Proposed Action would be consistent with the State Implementation Plan for air quality. The State Highway Department's "I-35E Air Quality Report" documents the air quality study. The Depart- ment sent the report to the Minnesota Pollution Con- trol Agency (MPCA) and the U.S. Environmental Protec- tion Agency for review and comment. Responses from both agencies concurred in the basic conclusions of the Air Quality Report. The MPCA agreed that the action would be consistent with the State Implementa- tion Plan. 56 FHWA Design Noise Levels NOISE IMPACTS The Proposed Action would conform to FHWA design noise level standards as outlined in Federal -Aid Highway Policy Manual (FHPM) 7-7-3. Table 9 shows FHWA design noise levels for various land uses. TABLE 9 F.H.W.A. DESIGN NOISE LEVEL/LAND USE RELATIONSHIPS Land Use Design Noise Category Level - Lin A A 60 dBA2r3 (Exterior) B D E 70 dBA (Exterior) 75 dBA (Exterior) 55 dBA (Interior) Description of Land Use Category Tracts of lands in which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary significance and serve an impor- tant public need, and where the preservation of those qualities is essential if the area is to continue to serve its intended purpose. Such areas could include amphitheaters. particular parks or portions of parks, or open spaces which are dedi- cated or recognized by appropriate officials for activities requiring special qualities of serenity and quiet. Residences, motels, hotels. public meeting rooms, schools, churches, libraries. hospitals, picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds, active sports areas. and parks. Developed lands, properties or activities not in- cluded in Categories A and B above. For requirements on undeveloped lands see paragraphs 5A(5) and (6). this PPM. Residences, motels, hotels, public meeting rooms, schools, churches, libraries, hospitals and auditoriums. SOURCE Federal Aid Highway Program Manual 7-7-3 10 - indicates the rate of occurrence of a given noise level. An L10 indicates that the given level is exceeded,10 percent of the time. 2dB - decibel, a measurement of sound pressure waves on the logarithmic scale. An increase of 10 dB doubles the perceived loudness. 3 A - A scale, the scale on sound measuring meters that is weighted to duplicate the sounds heard by the human ear. 57 1 State Noise Regulations Noise Study Impacts The table below summarizes the state noise standards as administered by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. The design of the Proposed Action would include all reasonable efforts to comply with the state standards, considering technical feasibility and cost of compliance. TABLE 10 STATE NOISE REGULATIONS The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (M.P.C.A.), as of November 27, 1974, has approved noise levels standards to control noise pollution. Noise levels were established for three classifications of land use: residential, commer- cial, and industrial. The residential (similar to Federal Category B), has a lower noise level for night hours (10:00 PM to 7:00 AM). The noise level goals are: Residential L1065 dBA (Night L1055 dBA), commercial L1070 dBA and industrial L1080 dBA. The State Highway Department used field measurements to determine existing noise levels and used the National Cooperative Highway Research Program 117-144 method with year 2000 estimated traffic volumes to predict the future noise levels. These noise levels were for the noisiest hour of the day, the 4-5:00 p.m. peak traffic hour Table II summarizes the existing and predicted noise levels for developed land uses along the Proposed Action corridor. SUMMARY OF NOISE ANALYSIS TABLE 11 ANALYSIS SITE SEE MAP DESCRIPTION CHARACTER OF LAND USE F.H.W.A. LAND USE CATEGORY EXISTINGPRN NOISE LEVEL (Llo — dBA) APPLICABLE STANDARD NOOICEEDISE LEVEL (YEAR 200(3) NOISE TREATMENT FEASIBLE NOISE LEVEL AFTER TREATMENT FHWA STATE A Volley Vier Heights I-35E of TH 110 RESIDENTIAL B 53 70 65 76 YES 1.65 B Eost of Lexington Avenue Between TH 55 and C.S.A.H 26 RESIDENTIAL B 53 70 65 77 YES A65 C C.S.A.H. 31 (Pilot Knob Rd.) to Blockhowk Lake RESIDENTIAL B 60 70 65 76 NO NA D Blockhowk Loki to Deerwood Drive RESIDENTIAL 8 55 70 65 76 NO NA E C.S.A.H. 30 to Blockhowk Rood RESIDENTIAL B 68 70 65 75 NO NA F Kings Rood at C.S.A.H 23 (Cedar Ave) RESIDENTIAL. 9 — 70 65 74 NO NA G Polornino Hills and Ville du Porc RESIDENTIAL 8 55 70 65 74 YES 65 H Heather Hilts and I38th Street RESIDENTIAL B 50 70 65 73 NO NA i 58 EXHIBIT 20 NOISE IMPACT SITES 111111111111111111111/11 1 44 0000 Alternatives Al & A2 All existing developed land uses that are within im- pact distance of the Proposed Action are residential. Table 12 breaks down the noise impact by alternate and by total number of residential units impacted. 0f the 58 residences impacted by future noise levels exceed- ing the FHWA design noise level of 70 dBA, noise abate- ment can reasonably protect 51 of them. The remaining seven residences are isolated sites which will require further study to determine the extent of the impact and the feasibility of protection. Exceptions to the FHWA design noise levels may be necessary for these seven isolated residences. TABLE 12 NOISE IMPACT OF PROPOSED ACTION ON EXISTING RESIDENTIAL UNITS ( YEAR 2000 ESTIMATE ). ANALYSIS SITE MAP ALTERNATE A, UNITS wan NOISE LEVELS EXCEE0N6 ALTERNATE A, uNiTS WITH NOISE LEVELS EYCEEDN6 LIO 70 dBA L10 65 dBA L1C 70 dBA I. i0 65 d8A AREA AB TEM Ni ABATEMENT ABATEMENT ABATEMENT ABATEMENT ABATEMENT ABATEMENT ABATEMENT A 20 0 49 0 20 0 49 0 B 7 0 33 0 7 0 33 0 C 1 1 7 7 2 2 4 4 D 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 E 3 3 8 8 3 3 6 6 F I 1 3 3 1 1 3 3 G 24 0 64 0 24 0 64 0 H 1 I 3 3 1 I 3 3 Total 58 7 168 22 58 7 163 17 ESTIMATES ARE MADE ASSUM NG NO NATURAL BARR ERS EXIST AFTER CONSTRUCTION.' Control of land use to avoid incompatible development along the Proposed Action is a function of local govern- ment. Noise abatement of future development adjacent to the Proposed Action would be the responsibility of the developer. The State Highway Department will provide the future noise forecasts to the municipalities to help plan ad- jacent development. Additional right of way was purchased by the State High- way Department along the Proposed Action through Palo- mino Hills and Ville du Parc (Area G, Exhibit 20) in anticipation of the need for noise abatement. t t t 1 60 No -build The initial noise levels for the No -build Alternative would be the same as those that exist in the Study Area today. Noise levels would rise steadily as traf- fic volumes increase. The greatest impact from the No -build would be felt along TH 13. Current noise levels along TH 13 exceed the FHWA de- sign noise levels for land use catagory B. The No - build traffic volume for the year 2000 would result in a 6 dBA increase to the existing levels. This would create a wide noise impact zone, impacting a sub- stantial number of people. Since the current design of TH 13 would not handle all of the projected traffic increase and because construction of noise abatement would eliminate many of the existing impacted sites, the actual impact is difficult to assess. For a more detailed discussion of noise analysis, see Noise Analysis Report; SP 1982 (1-35E), Minnesota Highway Department, 1976. 61 COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND SERVICES Introduction Individually, the cities of the Study Area offer the following facilities and services: fire protection, police protection, community planning, local street construction and maintenance, and building inspection. The other community services come from regional, state, and county units of government. The library is the only county facility in the Study Area. The rest of the county facilities are in the county seat, Hastings, in Rosemount, and in Farmington. State and regional facilities such as drug treatment centers are avail- able in Minneapolis and St. Paul. School districts are independent of the other units of government. Many of the community facilities such as churches and medical clinics are not governmental, and their areas of influence are not clearly defined. Administrative and Each of the four cities has an administration build - Other Governmental ing (City Hall) and a municipal maintenance building Buildings (see exhibit, facing page). The administration build- ings house the administration, police, and, in Burns- ville and Apple Valley, the fire department. Police and Fire The administration buildings are not generally in the center of their city, but are on local major thorough- fares. None of the alternatives would have a signifi- cant impact on the municipal buildings. Each of the four cities in the Study Area has its own Protection full-time police department. Although the police departments are independent of one another, they are related through mutual -aid pacts. They are also supported by the Dakota County Chief's Association, the Dakota County Sheriff's Association, the State Crime Bureau, and the Civil Defense System. Apple Valley, Eagan, and Mendota Heights have volun- teer fire departments. Burnsville's public safety officers are both police and firemen. Burnsville and Apple Valley house their fire departments in their city halls. Eagan and Mendota Heights house them separately. 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 62 EXHIBIT 21 f e r t 1 COMMUNITY SERVICES AND FACILITIES Police Department Fire Station Ambulance Hospital Public Works Post Office City Garage City Hall Library Recreation Libraries Postal Facilities As with the police departments, the fire departments are related to those of the other local communities through mutual -aid pacts. In addition to providing fire protection to the resi- dents, the fire departments provide emergency care for any serious accident on either local roads or on the freeways. The Proposed Action would not isolate any presently developed areas from police or fire protection. As the new areas develop, however, the freeway would act as a constraint that local officials must consider in planning emergency service. The No -build Alternative would not isolate any areas. But some intersections already become saturated with traffic during rush hours, making access difficult for the police and fire departments. Access would become more difficult as the area develops and as traffic increases. The only library in the Study Area is the Dakota County Main Library on CSAH 42 in Burnsville. It is the main library for all of Dakota County. The county does not expect to build any new libraries in the near future. Two mobile libraries operate out of the main library. They make regular stops in many of the neighborhoods, mainly in the northern part of the county, to bring the library facilities within walking distance to as many people as possible. The No -build Alternative would have little impact on the library system. The Proposed Action would not have a negative impact on the library. One of the reasons for locating the library at this location is that the directors expected the Proposed Action to give better access for the book- mobiles going to Eagan and for the residents going to the library. Three post offices serve the Study Area. The Proposed Action would impact postal delivery only on routes that include severed roads, but the change in mileage would not be significant. The No -build Alternative would have no impact on postal delivery. The U. S. Postal Service opened a Bulk Mailing Center (BMC) in 1975 in northern Eagan. One of the criteria used in choosing the site was the location of the Pro- posed Action. It would greatly ease the hauling of mail from the rail center in St. Paul to the BMC. 64 Shopping Centers Medical Facilities Existing shopping facilities are primarily grouped in small, local shopping centers scattered throughout the Study Area. All shopping requires some driving. The Study Area contains no open regional shopping centers. Developers, however, are now building a center at the junction of CR 42 and 1-35. It will be open in 1977. It will serve an area that extends north to the Minnesota and Mississippi Rivers and south to Albert Lea. The developers expect 250,000 people to support the center. It will thus be a major traffic generator with traffic in excess of 25,000 vehicle trips per day. One of the requirements of a major center is good traffic access. The Proposed Action would aid the traffic flow to the north and east. The No -build Alternative would have no beneficial impacts, and by restricting traffic, it would have some adverse impacts. The Study Area contains no hospitals, and the resi- dents depend on regional facilities. Hospital care is available in St. Paul, Minneapolis, Shakopee, Farmington, Bloomington, and South St. Paul. Fairview Community Hospitals is now building a com- plete medical complex at 138th Street and Nicollet Avenue in Burnsville. (see Area #9, Exhibit 25, page 77). It will have a hospital, a nursing home, ambulance service, and several clinics. Some of these facilities should be open by 1977 or 1978 and the com- plex should be complete by 1984.1 Ambulance services within the Study Area are avail- able from two sources. It is also available from a private service located outside of the Study Area. The Proposed Action would not have any significant impact on any present medical facilities, but would provide better access to facilities outside of the Study Area. The future Fairview medical complex will be a regional facility, and will probably generate a significant amount of traffic. The Proposed Action would substan- tially benefit the medical complex by providing safe and convenient access to the site. Cemeteries The Study Area contains 9 cemeteries. The Proposed Action would affect none of them. 1The Ridges, Brauer and Associates, Inc. 1974. p. 28 65 Schools The Study Area includes parts of four school districts: Districts #191, #194, #196, and #197. The Study Area contains 15 elementary schools, three junior high schools, and three senior high schools. Of these, St. Thomas Academy in Mendota Heights is the only private school. The Proposed Action would not impact the schools. The nearest school to either of the two alternatives is St. Thomas Academy, about 1,000 feet from the Proposed Action corridor. At this distance noise would not be a problem. Construction of this project would sever three roads and might require changing the school bus routes, but it would not isolate any presently developed areas. As new areas develop, however, the highway would be a constraint to be considered in bus route planning. The school districts have already anticipated this problem, and in 1969 the Minnesota Legislature passed permissive legislation that allowed Independent School Districts #191 and #196 to exchange territory and to establish their common boundary along the centerline of the proposed highway action. At that time they could not agree on how to equitably exchange areas of equal student populations and tax -lands, and they dropped the issue. Since then the Legislature has changed the school funding laws, and the need for the school districts to balance the number of students with an appropri- ate amount of tax land is no longer critical. Realign- ing the boundaries along the highway centerline would reduce the probability of isolating new areas as they develop. The No -build Alternative would have no direct impacts on the schools. As the traffic increases, however, it could cause safety problems. The potential of this problem can be seen by reviewing the build versus the no -build traffic volumes on the local road system (see pages II and 12). 66 EXHIBIT 22 SCHOOL DISTRICTS SCHOOL DIST 191 eon Historical Society Review Unrecorded Discoveries During Construction TABLE 13 HISTORICAL AND ARCHEOLOGICAL FEATURES The Minnesota Historical Society (MHS), under an agree- ment with the State Highway Department and the Federal Highway Administration, conducts archeological Recon- naissance surveys of the proposed highway projects. The MHS reviews a proposed project's potential impact on sites of archeological, or cultural significance. The MHS also surveys a project's potential impact to sites of historical and architectural significance. The MHS surveyed the Proposed Action corridor in 1974. The Exhibit on the facing page shows the location of the known sites of significance within and adjacent to the Study Area, identified by the Historical Society. The State Historical Preservation Officer and the Fed- eral Highway Administration conclude that the Proposed Action will have no effect upon any properties possess- ing historical, architectural, archeological, or cul- tural value which are included in or are eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. See Appendix A for letter from the State Historic Pre- servation Officer. If construction operations uncover any unrecorded archeological remains, the State Highway Department construction specifications require that the contrac- tor restrict or suspend operations in the immediate are of the discovery until the State Historical Society can study the discovery, determine its value, and develop a method of preserving it. CULTURAL SITES IN BURNSVILLE, EAGAN, APPLE VALLEY, AND MENDOTA HEIGHTS Svmsoi SITE NO. OR NAME LOCATION SITE TYPE CONDITION STATUS 8 DK-8 NWk.Sec. 19, T27N, R23W Burial Mounds Disturbed Under Coneld., SP. 1925 17 DK-17 W'tr. NW'r., Sec 27, T28N, R23W Burial Mounds Disturbed I 18 DK-18 Ws. NW''. Sec 27, T28N, R23W Griot Mounds Disturbed U 19 DK-19 SW'+. SW, Sec 13 8 SE'S. SE S. Burial Mounds Disturbed I Sec 14, T28N, R23W 20 DK-20 SEA, NW:. Sec 23, T28N, R23W Burial Mounds Disturbed U 24 DK-24 Sec. 27, T28N, R23W Historic Army Excellent Pe Cantonment 23 DK-25 SE:. Sec. 18, T27N, R23W Historic Aboriginal Dietwbed U Bunch 26 DK-26 SE iii. SW:. Sec. 8 8 NE:. NW:. Historic Aboriginal Disturbed• U Sec. 17, 727N, R23W Burials D 01d Fat Snelling Jct. Minn. 8 Miss Riven Military Restored P• Historic District 0 Pilot Knob Sec. 28, T28N, R23W Historic Landmark Excellent 9 N Old Mendota Historic Historic Escellsnt P. District, Mendota NO SITES RECORDED IN BURNSVILLE OR APPLE VALLEY SITE STATUS DESIGNATIONS. U —Unknown, Investigation Required To Determine Status. P— lion, Unique And/Or Significant Site —Should Not Be Disturbed. S—Salvageable, Significant But May Be " Mitigated • Through Salvage, Excavation Or Moving. I —Insignificant, Site Thin Or Disturbed Requiring Na Further Consideration. •—National Registrar. 68 EXHIBIT 23 re000 ma." Local Recreation Open Space RECREATIONAL OPEN SPACE In this report we define recreational open space as land and water resources, such as parks, recreation areas, or game refuges, specifically designed to allow and encourage recreational activity. This project has been reviewed by the appropriate agencies to determine the possible involvement of land and properties falling under the provision of Section 4(f) of the U.S. Department of Transportation Act of 1966. It does not require the use of any publicly owned lands from a park, recreational area, wildlife or waterfowl refuge of national, state, or local sig- nificance. The following is a brief review of the extent of impacts to open space areas. Three local recreation open space areas are adjacent to the corridor of Alternative Al and two areas are adjacent to the corridor of Alternative A2. These areas serve a limited use to the immediate neighbor- hood or community. Burnsville owns an area north of 138th St. (Area #1, Exhibit 24). A letter from Burnsville, dated December 3, 1970, states, "The terrain in this region is quite roll- ing and there are no specified plans at this time for development for organized play activities. For the most part, the land will probably remain in a natural state and be used essentially as an open space area for the immediate neighborhood." To date, they have not devel- oped the property. A large parcel of Burnsville public land (Area #2) lies between CR II and the proposed corridor. The land was to be a public golf course, but in 1974 the citizens of Burnsville defeated a bond issue to finance the construc- tion. The land is now undeveloped, and Burnsville is not considering any specific plans for it. A 40 acre Eagan park (Area #3) abuts the Alternative Al corridor near Blackhawk Lake. The owner -developer of the land on the south and east sides of Blackhawk Lake has proposed a trail around the lake. The trail would pass under the Blackhawk Lake bridge and would connect the park with the area to the east of the Alternative Al alignment. 70 EXHIBIT 24 OPEN SPACE Parks, Recreation Golf Courses $011 School Grounds Proposed Parks, Recreation L° 44 Proposed School Grounds / 35 ILL Regional Recreation Open Space State Recreational Open Space Eagan anticipates that the park will have picnic facil- ities and nature trails. The active uses would be near the northwest corner of the park and the highway would not significantly impact them. Alternative A2 would not have any direct impacts on the park. A proposed trail (Area #4) would intersect the Proposed Action near Blackhawk Road. The trail would follow a powerline easement through Eagan and into Burnsville. The State Highway Department is cooperating with the City of Eagan to coordinate the design of the two facil- ities. Eagan does not currently have any jurisdiction over the trail but proposes to acquire the property at a future date. The remainder of the local recreation areas are scat- tered throughout the Study Area. None of the alter- natives would have any direct impacts on any of them. In the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area, regional recrea- tion open space is any area that the Metropolitan Coun- cil has determined to be of regional significance. Three such areas are in or adjacent to the Study Area. Ramsey County is developing the Lillydale Regional Park (Area A) between Mendota Heights and the Missis- sippi River. Lebanon Hills Park (Area B) is on the southern border of Eagan and connects to the Minnesota Zoological Garden. Murphy-Hanrahan Park (Area C) is along the southwest edge of the Study Area, but the majority of its land is in Savage and Credit River. The Lillydale Park is about 300 acres. Lebanon Hills and Murphy-Hanrahan Parks are considerably larger at 2,200 and 2,700 acres, respectively. The Proposed Action would not directly impact any of the three regional parks and would not generate a significant increase in their use. Improved access, however, would aid some open space users. Two open space areas of State significance are in the Study Area. The Fort Snelling State Park (FSSP, Exhibit 24) is in the Minnesota River bottoms along the northern edge of the Study Area. The Minnesota Zoological Gardens (Zoo, Exhibit 24) is near the center of the Study Area, in northern Apple Valley. The portion of the Fort Snelling State Park in the Study Area is relatively undeveloped. The Proposed Action would not impact this open space area. The No -build Alternative would have a minor negative impact of increased highway related pollutants caused by a higher volume of traffic on TH 13. r t t 72 t t Minnesota Zoological Gardens National Recreation Open Space The Minnesota Zoological Gardens will be one of the major open space and cultural attractions in the Study Area. The Minnesota Zoological Board estimates that this 480 acre zoo will attract 1.3 million vis- itors per year after it opens in 1977. They expect that by the year 2000 it will attract 2.2 million visitors per year. The zoo will be a major traffic generator. 0n summer peak days, it could generate as much as 8,000 to 9,000 vehicles per day. It will generate very little traffic in the colder months. The Zoo Board believes that most of the traffic will originate from, or at least funnel through, the Twin City Metropolitan Area, and that the traffic will use the major freeways and highways to get to the zoo. They believe that 90 per cent of all zoo traffic will approach the site by way of 1-35W, 1-35E, and TH 36 (Cedar Avenue) when they are all complete. The Proposed Action, then, would have a positive impact on the zoo. "One of the primary reasons for selecting this site was the fact that I-35E would be accessible as a major traffic mover, both to and from the zoo site."1 Since the closest part of the zoo is almost a mile from the highway corridor, the Proposed Action would not have any direct negative impact on it. The No -build Alternative would have a negative impact on the zoo; it would not provide the major access from St. Paul that is needed for such a large traffic gen- erator. It would not significantly affect the traffic from Minneapolis that would use I-35W or TH 36. No recreation open spaces of national significance are in the Study Area. The U. S. Department of In- terior, Fish and Wildlife Service, however, has pro- posed a large wildlife area in and adjacent to the Study Area. The proposed Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge (Exhibit 24) stretches along the river valley from Carver to Eagan. Management responsibilities will be shared by the various political subdivisions along the river, but the majority of the responsibility will belong to the Fish and Wildlife Service, who will manage it as a National Wildlife Refuge. The Fish and Wildlife Service is now preparing an environmental im- pact statement for the proposed area. 1Letter from Donald D. Bridgewater, Director, Minnesota Zoological Garden, March 6, 1974. 73 Private Recreation Open Spaces The Proposed Action would not have any direct or in- direct impacts to any existing or proposed National Recreational Open Spaces. The No -build Alternative would possibly have a minor impact of increased pollu- tion from increased traffic on TH 13. The Proposed Action would impact the Mendakota Country Club which is in the southeast quadrant of the 1-35E and TH 110 interchange. Highways border three of its sides. The corridor of the Proposed Action abuts the golf course, but of the three adja- cent highway corridors, the I-35E corridor is the farthest away from the areas of active use. An undeveloped buffer of land lies between the fair- ways and the corridor. The negative visual impact of the corridors would be minimized with landscaping. 74 The Study Area Sensitive Human Areas AESTHETICS Introduction This section considers the physical appearance of the Proposed Action and the impacts on the beauty of the Study Area. It will also discuss a landscape concept plan to reduce the impacts and to help blend the Pro- posed Action into the surrounding natural landscape. The integration of a highway into the landscape is important to both the driver and the resident. The pleasure of driving and the feeling of safety depends, in part, on how well the highway blends into the land- scape. Pleasant views and diverse landscapes are visu- ally more stimulating and appealing to the driver and are, therefore, more desirable. A well planned highway might also minimize the negative attitudes of nearby residents. The far northern part of the Study Area is a broad and generally undeveloped river valley. The central part is a band of steep hills, ponds, lakes, and woods. The southern part is an area of rolling hills, grass- lands, and farms. It is also a growing, urbanizing portion of the Twin City Metropolitan Area, and so, it is quickly becoming an area of residential, commercial, and industrial developments. Large areas that were formerly farms or woods are now interspersed with in- dustrial parks, shopping centers, or housing develop- ments. View of the Road The view of the road includes the visual impacts of the Proposed Action on the Study Area residents and on the sensitive human areas such as homes and parks. The principal components of the view of the road in- clude its surface, structures, lights, and the cut and fill areas of the roadway. The viewer's perception of the highway depends on factors such as the setting, the weather, and the distance from the highway. The evaluation of the view of the road depends on the atti- tudes of the viewer, on his physical point of view, on how well the highway blends with the surrounding topo- graphy, and on the purposes of the adjacent sensitive human areas. 75 The most sensitive areas are residences. Other sensi- tive human activity areas are hospitals, schools, churches, parks, and public places. The Proposed Action would impact the view for four existing housing developments, an existing golf course, three planned open space areas, and the Ridges medical complex. The remaining adjacent lands are undeveloped. Residential The housing areas would all require noise attenuation Areas (sound barriers) that would also act as sight barriers to existing views. Country Club Blackhawk Lake The highway corridor would pass through open, undevel- oped land in the vicinity of Valley View Heights (Area #I, Exhibit 25) and the Lexington Avenue (Area #2) resi dential areas. The topography at these two locations would place the highway considerably lower than the homes. Near Valley View Heights, the highway would lie in a natural low area which would allow visual and noise screening without obscuring the view to the opposite hill. Near Lexington Avenue, it would be depressed in a flat area with the resulting noise and visual screening acting as a complete barrier to the view of the opposite side of the highway. As the opposite side land use at this point is industrial, the aesthetic view could result in a positive impact. Adjacent to the Palomino Hills (Area 3) and Ville du Parc (Area 4) residential areas, the Proposed Action would pass through rolling terrain and would require extensive clearing of vegetation. Because of the rolling topography, the freeway would be alternately elevated and depressed. Total depression is not possi- ble because of drainage restraints along this area. The Mendakota Country Club (Area 5) is adjacent to the Proposed Action at the junction with TH 110. The parti- ally constructed alignment south of TH 110 has existed for several years. A vegetative barrier along the golf course edge would minimize the view of the freeway. Alternative Al would bridge Blackhawk Lake (Area 6) near the lake's narrowest point. Because the bridge is elevated over the natural topography as it crosses the lake, users of Eagan's recreation area along the southwestern edge of the lake would be aware of the visual intrusion of the bridge. The bridge would also disrupt the view for the residents who live on the hills surrounding the lake. 76 EXHIBIT 25 SENSITIVE HUMAN AREAS VISUAL IMPACTS i�MdE50YA Burnsville Open Space The Ridges Medical Complex Design Speed FEATURE T 3 b w W Alternative A2 would have less visual impact to the Blackhawk Lake area. It would pass through the hills to the east of the lake, blending more naturally with the existing topography of the lake basin. The Proposed Action would lie adjacent to the two parcels of public land (Areas 7 and 8) which the City of Burns- ville plans to develop, and would impact the view from these areas. The city, however, acquired the lands with knowledge of the freeway location and has indicated that development of the areas would consider the potential impacts. The Ridges hospital (Area 9) would be directly against the Proposed Action alignment, but the impacts would probably be small because the plans for the hospital consider the proposed freeway location. The hospital development plan indicated that the hospital buildings would be completely climate controlled and could with- stand the impact of the freeway. View From The Road The motorist's view from the road is affected by the speed of the vehicle, the design of the roadway, and the elevation of the roadway in relation to the sur- rounding area. As the motorist's speed increases, the foreground details fade rapidly and moving objects blend. The driver does not see clearly except in the distance. At a speed of 60 miles per hour (mph), the motorist's vision is adequate only within an angle of 40 degrees and at a distance between 110 and 1,400 feet --an in- terval that is traveled in Tess than 15 seconds. The horizontal and vertical alignment of the roadway greatly determines the direction of the view for the motorist. While passengers have a wide sweep of vis- ion, the driver must operate within a narrow cone of vision centered on the roadway ahead. He can view only those features that are within that cone. He can however, see features that lie directly ahead on a curved roadway. The elevation of the roadway in relation to its sur- roundings determines the boundaries of the view avail- able to the motorist. A depressed roadway encloses the view; the lines of the noise walls or of the back - slopes converging in the distance, focus the driver's attention on the roadway ahead. Only careful land- scaping of the enclosure can break up the strong lines and relieve the monotony. 78 Landscape Concept Elevated roadways allow a panoramic view. The fore- ground objects do not block distant views, and there is no sense of boundary restrictions. Alternative Al is depressed as it approaches Blackhawk Lake. The motorist would be aware of the lake only momentarily as he crossed the bridge. Alternative A2 would reveal the lake for a longer period of time and would provide a better view of the lake for the motorist. The types and variety of features in a view determines its quality. Generally, the motorist will consider natural features such as water or woodlands, or sites of historic or architectural significance, such as churches and schools, as being of a better quality than those of commercial, industrial, or multi -family housing developments, or of gravel pits or billboards. Generally, the quality of the view increases as the variety increases. The Proposed Action would run through a rugged landscape, and the view from the road- way would change rapidly. The differing colors, tex- tures, and shapes of the Study Area's hills, ponds, woodlands, and farms would provide enough variety for a high quality view. The natural view from the road will be eventually lost to urbanized development. The degree of change will depend on the amount of consideration given the road- way in the planning of the adjacent land uses. Actions to Minimize Harm The purposes of landscaping are to minimize the highway impacts and blend the roadway into the natural setting, to reduce the future roadside maintenance and potential safety hazards, and to reduce noise in order to create a more aesthetically pleasing and functional highway. The following are the principles on which the land- scaping plan is based: I. As much of the existing vegetation as possible would be retained. These existing materials are usually of high quality. They include oak, elm, ash, maple, and evergreen trees. 2. Plant materials would be used individually and in masses to provide interesting and attractive views. 3. Boulevard plantings (large decidious trees such as ash or maple) would be used on freeway right-of- way, next to a frontage road to provide a visual buffer. 79 4. Mass plantings would be used: to naturalize the slope areas and to break the monotonous view of the noise walls for the residents. For the motorist, plantings should undulate and vary in form to create a visually interesting, and safe, travel corridor. - to integrate bridge structures into the slopes by planting near abutments. These plantings would receive a good mulch of wood chips to reduce maintenance, aid plant growth, and im- prove appearance. - to increase the survival rate of plant material, which, when in a mass, tend to be more protected from elements. Most damage occurs on the edges. The species of plant material --ground covers, shrubs, vines, trees, or grasses --would be selected to pro- vide food for wildlife, particularly song birds. The soils, slopes, sun, moisture, orientation, exposure, and drainage vary at each planting site; therefore, the landscape plan would give special consideration to the selection of plant species at each site to ensure sur- vival. The landscape plan would also consider the visual quali- ties of the plants such as texture, size, form, seasonal color changes, and density. It would also consider the plant's tolerance to de-icing salts and other contami- nants and to their tolerance to temperature extremes. Both motorists and nearby residents desire an attrac- tive highway; the motorist expects to have a pleasing view of the road; the resident desires to see a pleas- ant view to preserve his property value and to main- tain his quality of life. Proper plant selection, design, installation, and maintenance would help safe- guard these values. For a further discussion of the impacts to aesthetics, see Aesthetic Evaluation and Landscape Concept, I-35E in Dakota County, Office of Environmental Services, Minnesota Highway Department, 1975. 80 CHARACTERISTICS OF POPULATION Introduction i t 1 t t t t The basic demographic data for the Study Area is from the 1970 U.S. Census Data. The State Highway Depart- ment, however, conducted a survey' which indicated that more than 60 percent of the Study Area residents did not live in the Study Area in 1970. The major reason for the number of new residents is the substantial population growth in the Study Area communities. The Study Area grew from 45,005 persons in 1970 to 71,533 persons by 1975, a 59 per cent in- crease in five years. Based on an analysis of area housing construction (housing costs reflecting the medium and high income characteristics of the residents coupled with a lack of low income construction), it appears that current population composition should be generally similar to the 1970 Census Data. The 1970 Census Data there- fore describes the population characteristics while the State Highway Department survey describes the housing and employment characteristics. TABLE 14 AGE Study Area SMSA Total Persons 45,005 1,813,647 18 years and younger 48.9% 38.1% 19 to 64 years 49.4% 53.2% 65 years and older 1.7% 8.7% MARITAL STATUS Total Persons 14 years and Older 26,858 1,294,298 Married 76.5% 62.2% Unmarried 23.5% 37.8% 'Transportation and Attitude Survey for Interstate 35E - in Dakota County, Minnesota, 1976. Minnesota Highway Department 81 Age Minorities The Study Area population is young; almost half are 18 years or younger; less than 2 per cent are 65 years or older. More than three -fourths older than 14 years are married. The 1970 census shows that the elderly persons are not concentrated. Thus the Proposed Action would have no impact on elderly persons. TABLE 15 RACE Total Persons White Non -White Study Area SMSA 45,005 99. 4% 0.6% SPANISH LANGUAGE SPEAKING PEOPLE Total Persons Persons Speaking Spanish 45,068 0.4% NATIVITY AND PARENTAGE Totals Persons Native of Native Parentage Native of Foreign or Mixed Parentage Foreign Born 45,068 89.9% 8.6% 1.5% 1,813,647 97.2% 2.8% 1,813,647 0. 9% 1,813,647 92. 3% 3.0% 3.0% • The 1970 census does not indicate any concentrations of racial or ethnic minorities. The Study Area popu- lation contains a very low percentage of non -white, Spanish speaking, or foreign -born persons. Ninety per- cent were born of native-born parents. The impacts on racial or ethnic minorities, then, would be small and isolated. 82 Education Special Groups TABLE 16 SCHOOL ENROLLMENT Study Area SMSA Total enrolled, 3 to 34 years 15,968 570,078 Nursery 3.2% 2.1% Kindergarten 8.4% 6.2% Elementary 62.7% 54.3% High School 19.8% 23.9% College 5.9% 13.6% SCHOOL YEARS COMPLETED Total persons 25 Years and older Less than elementary Completed Elementary Completed High School Completed College Median school years completed Study Area SMSA 20,443 2.0% 14.3% 59.7% 24.0% 13.1% 928,219 6.4% 27.5% 51.3% 14.8% 12.4% School enrollment is predominantly in elementary school. This correlates to the high percentage of young people in the Study Area. A majority of the population over 25 years has completed high school, and many have completed college. The Study Area has a significantly larger percentage of college educated persons than the total SMSA has. Because all roads bridging over it would have sidewalks, the Proposed Action would not significantly impact pedes- trians or bicyclists either positively or negatively. The Study Area is now highly dependent on automobiles for transportation. The Proposed Action would not change this dependency and would not, therefore, create any signficant changes in the mobility or lifestyles of nondrivers or those dependent on public transportation. Population density, a factor in the efficiency of public transportation, will probably remain low. The Proposed Action would not directly impact community services and facilities for the handicapped or illiter- ate persons. An increase in urbanization, however, would result in an increase in the number and in diversity of services. 83 Occupation Income EMPLOYMENT TABLE 17 Total All Workers White Collar Workers Blue Collar Workers Median Family Income Median Unrelated Individual Income OCCUPATION Study Area SMSA 16,129 759,606 67.4% 56.7% 32.6% 43.3% INCOME $13,825 $ 5,329 $11,682 $ 3,461 More than two-thirds of the Study Area workers are white collar workers; according to the 1970 census, the category containing the largest percentage of Study Area workers is the professional, technical, and related fields. The largest percentage of families in the Study Area earned between $10,000 and $14,000 per year in 1970. Seventy-one per cent earned between $10,000 and $24,999. The percentage of families with incomes less than $5,000 per year is very low. TABLE 18 PLACES OF EMPLOYMENT Total Workers Anoka County Carver County Dakota County Hennepin County Ramsey County Scott County Washington County Rest of Minnesota Out of State 0.3% 0.4% 30.0% 50.0% 16.0% 2.0% 0.5% 0.7% 0.1% 84 1 1 1 Description i Impacts 1 1 1 1 1 The 1975 survey showed that 70 percent of the workers went outside of the county to work; a breakdown by munici- pality shows that more than 80 percent went out of the Study Area to work. The Proposed Action would aid those workers who work in the eastern portion of the metropoli- tan area. The industrial area of Eagan is becoming in- creasingly important and is drawing more of the workers. The Proposed Action would provide access both from the southern areas and from Ramsey and Washington Counties. Many of the Eagan industrial area workers are local workers from the Study Area. The No -build Alternative would not directly impact the present access of the workers to the employment areas of the metropolitan area, but as traffic increases, it would not provide the necessary access. NEIGHBORHOODS Until the 1950's the Study Area was generally a rural and sparsely populated area. Portions of Mendota Heights and a strip along TH 13 were the only signifi- cantly developed parts of the Study Area. Since then the area has grown steadily and rapidly. Most of the growth has been in defined groups and clusters of homes built by developers. The Study Area neighborhoods generally identify with these groups and clusters. The corridor for the Proposed Action has been a part of the Study Area since 1959. As the section on land use planning shows (page 14), the Study Area communities have prevented development of the corridor, and as the area grew, the neighborhoods developed around it. The Proposed Action, then, would not impact neighbor- hood cohesion by isolating or by bisecting any estab- lished neighborhoods. HOUSING The Study Area now contains over 20,000 residences and is growing so rapidly that the 1970 census tract data is too far out of date to provide a valid analysis of the housing. The 1975 Transportation Information and Attitude Survey, however, provides a good indication of the type and age of the housing. 85 TABLE 19 TYPE OF DWELLING Apple Mendota Valley Burnsville Eagan Heights Study Area Single family farm or 77% 66% 67% 98% 70% single family residence Multiple family residence 5% 14% 19% 2% 12% Townhouse or Condominium 8% 15% 14% 0 13% Mobile Home 10% 5% 0 0 5% LENGTH OF RESIDENCE 5 years or less 62% 62% 62% 33% 61% 6 to 10 years 29% 25% 17% 24% 24% 11 years or more 9% 13% 21% 43% 15% Impacts The survey indicated that 61 percent of the residents had lived in the Study Area five years or less, 85 per cent have lived in the Study Area 10 years or less. The survey also indicated that 86 per cent own or are buying their homes. The indication, then, is that the Study Area contains a large number of single family homes that are 10 years old or newer. The two alternatives of the Proposed Action would each require purchasing residences as a part of the right- of-way requirements. TABLE 20 RESIDENCES REQUIRED FOR RIGHT OF WAY BY VALUE Alternative Al Alternative A2 Under $25,000 4 6 $25,000 to $50,000 10 12 $50,000 and over 6 7 Total 20 25 t 86 Alternative Al would require 20 residences and Alterna- tive A2 would require 25 residences. A residence is defined as a single-family home, a mobile home, or a farmstead. Neither of the build alternatives would re- quire any multiple -family residences such as apartment buildings or duplexes. The No -build Alternative would not require any homes. Residents from four homes have already been relocated. TABLE 21 RESIDENCES REQUIRED FOR RIGHT OF WAY BY MUNICIPALITY Alternative Al Alternative A2 Apple Valley 1 1 Burnsville 0 0 Eagan 16 21 Mendota Heights 3 3 Total 20 25 For a comprehensive discussion of socio-economic im- pacts, see I-35E Dakota County Social Economic Report, January 1976, Minnesota Highway Department. Right of Way .Requirements PROPERTY DISPLACEMENT The Proposed Action would require converting approxi- mately 1100 acres of land, currently not used for transportation, to highway right of way. It would also incorporate an additional 100 acres of existing roadway into the freeway design to perpetuate the local street system. TABLE 22 LAND USES DISPLACED BY THE PROPOSED ACTION EXISTING LAND USE ALTERNATE 1 ALTERNATE 2 ACRES BUILDINGS ACRES BUILDINGS INDUSTRIAL 58 0 58 0 COMMERCIAL 3 0 3 0 RESIDENTIAL 78 20 84 25 TAX EXEMPT 31 0 31 0 PUBLIC ROADS 100 0 105 0 UNDEVELOPED 909 0 913 0 Existing Land Use Table 22 catagorizes the land uses impacted. Impacts The amount of undeveloped land is high because the Study Area communities have not allowed development to occur in most of the corridor. An exception to the municipal control is the residential development along Alternative A2. The Alternative A2 design is a recent modification of the Proposed Action which have not had the protection of long term development restraints. The differences between the impacts of land displace- ment by the Alternate designs occurs only to residen- tial property. The commercial and industrial land displaced is vacant land contiguous to active industrial land uses. No commercial or industrial buildings or facilities would be displaced. Approximately 37 percent of the total right of way for the Proposed Action has been acquired at a cost of $2,500,000. Almost all of the right of way has been acquired between 1-35 and CSAH 23 (Cedar Ave. -future TH 36). On the north end of the Proposed Action most of the right of way between CSAH 26 and TH 110 has been acquired. The total right of way acquisition would affect 132 to 134 separate properties. t a t i - 88 - EXISTING LAND USE Residential Commercial Industrial Open Space -Parks, Recreation hi.> Open Space -School Grounds s ti Cemeteries Undeveloped, Primarily Agricultural At 14 EXHIBIT 26 1111111111011101.111111. RELOCATION Replacement The real estate Multiple Listing Service area 730, Housing Dakota County --Mendota Heights, seems to be the most acceptable market listing of properties for sale near the proposed project. This area includes the cities of Mendota Heights, Eagan, Apple Valley, and Rosemount. The residents whose homes would be required by the Proposed Action would most likely relocate in this area. The Multiple Listing Service indicates a strong real estate sales market. Housing is available which would meet the decent, safe, and sanitary criteria and which would be reasonably close to shopping areas, churches, schools, and community facilities. The large number and the variety of homes for sale in the area would minimize the problems of the relocating residents in finding a new home within their financial means. Should any of the residents indicate that they would rather rent than re -purchase another home, the rental market is very favorable. Rental agencies provide free listings and free assistance in finding apart- ments or houses. The Highway Department District Relocation Office also maintains a current list of available housing. The list is available to any relocatee at any time. Relocation Assistance Neither of the build alternatives would require relo- cating any commercial, industrial, or other non-resi- dential establistments. The State Highway Department would assign a Relocation Advisor to aid any residents who are required to move. The Relocation Office would ensure that reloca- tion of all residents without regard to race, color, creed, or national origin into decent, safe, and sani- tary housing within the financial means of the resi- dents. It would also ensure that the resident is able to relocate in an area that is as satisfactory as possible. Residents would be reimbursed for moving expenses, closing expenses, interest differential, and appraisers' fees. For a more complete discussion of right of way and relocation impacts, see Right of Way Acquisition and Relocation, 1-35E, May 1976, Minnesota Highway Depart- ment. -90- ECONOMICS Tax Structure The Proposed Action would impact the tax base of the municipalities and the school districts by removing approximately 1070 acres of taxable land for right of way. Table 22 compares the total assessed valuation of each municipality and school district to the assessed valu- ation of the required right of way. The assessed valu- ation is a percentage (varying with the tax district) of the assessor's market estimate of the property. TABLE 23 RIGHT OF WAY IMPACT ON ASSESSED VALUATION TAX DISTRICT TOTAL ASSESSED VALUATION ASSESSED VALUATION OF NEEDED RAW % OF TOTAL ASSESSED VALUATION ALTERNATE 1 ALTERNATE t •LTEMIATE I ALTERNATE t MENDOTA HEIGHTS 29,299,414 199,000 199,000 0.7 0.7 EAGAN 64,093,077 663,000 698,000 1.0 1.1 APPLE VALLEY 36,375,755 44,000 45,000 0.1 0.1 BURNSVILLE 124, 611,963 224,000 224,000 0.2 0 2 SCHOOL DISTRICT 191 134,269,815 508,000 508,000 0.3 0.3 SCHOOL DISTRICT 196 89,984,079 464,000 496,000 0.5 0.6 SCHOOL DISTRICT 197 115,566,006 578,000 577,000 0.5 0.5 The impacts to the tax districts (municipalities or school districts) varies greatly. Eagan would receive the most impact; the Proposed Action would require approximately 1 percent of Eagan's property tax base. It would also impact the tax base of Dakota County, the watershed district, the Metropolitan Transit Com- mission, the Metropolitan Mosquito Control District, and the Metropolitan Council. They all receive funds based on property taxes. Their tax bases are so large, however, that the impact would probably be insignifi- cant. - 91 - Study Area Regional Impacts to Business Many of the businesses in the Study Area are on TH 13. Directing traffic off TH 13 and onto the Proposed Action would remove much of the traffic that now passes by these businesses. This would not, however, neces- sarily cause a negative impact. Research into the effects of bypassing communities and businesses indi- cates that bypassing itself does not necessarily have a negative impact. Bypassing usually enhances the economic environment by removing through -traffic and by reducing congestion. The No -build alternative, however, would probably have a negative impact on Study Area businesses. A survey of Study Area businessmen indicated that for about half of them, delays in building the Proposed Action had slowed growth and increased costs? The Proposed Action would be a link in the network of highways around the seven county Twin City Metropoli- tan Area and would be a part of the network that con- nects the metropolitan area to other cities in the Upper Midwest. As such, it would have impacts beyond its termini. A survey indicated that less than a third of the Study Area businessmen limit their market area to Dakota County. The rest said their market area includes all of the metropolitan area, the Upper midwest, or nation- al -international areas. The Proposed Action would also provide access for other areas such as the St. Paul Central Business District and the South St. Paul industrial area. 11-35E Dakota County Social -Economic Report, January 1976 Minnesota Highway Department Induced Growth SECONDARY IMPACTS The Proposed Action would induce impacts beyond the immediate corridor. Completion of the Proposed Act- ion would provide safer and faster access to a consid- erable amount of undeveloped land in and around the Study Area. Better access is an important factor in the urban growth cycle. This stimulation of growth could change existing patterns of social and economic activity and could impact the natural and aesthetic resources of the area. Not building the Proposed Action would not eliminate the eventual impacts of development, but it would probably significantly delay them. Development would likely occur first near the inter- change areas and would eventually reach throughout the Study Area. Induced growth beyond the Study Area would probably extend into Lakeville, along 1-35 and Cedar Avenue, and west into Savage along TH 13 and CSAH 42. The impacts from induced growth would generally be the same as the direct impacts that construction of the Proposed Action, itself, would cause. Wildlife would suffer through the Toss of habitat. Water resources would be depleted by urban site development and water resources could be degraded by additional residential, commercial, and industrial pollutants and waste waters. Aesthetic and natural terrain features would be altered and natural vegetation reduced. If unchecked, urban development could strain existing urban services before adequate new services are offered. The social and economic impact to the communities could be substantial. Most of these secondary impacts of the Proposed Action would be minimized through proper land use planning and through the exercise of local and regional controls on development. The Study Area communities and the Metropolitan Council are prepared to control the growth that the Proposed Action would induce. As discussed in "Status of Land Use Planning", Section I, the Proposed Action is an important part of the Metropolitan Council's Development Framework for an orderly control of growth within the seven - county metropolitan area. The Metropolitan Council defined the Urban Services Limit as the area in which it would like to place urban growth for the most effi- cient use of regional services and resources. Impacts to St. Paul Street System Many of the urban services such as water and sewer are already available in the undeveloped portions of the Study Area. The impact of new growth to these areas would be less than to many other areas in the region that are not prepared for development. The comprehensive plans of the Study Area communities and of the Metropolitan Council also address the con- servation and preservation of natural areas. The ul- timate impact of urbanization on the natural features will depend heavily on the controls developed and en- forced by the communities. Local comprehensive plans and the Metropolitan Devel- opment Guide control growth beyond the Urban Services Limit. Control of urban services beyond the urban service limit and the Council's influence on rural development along the urban fringe will reduce the impacts of induced development beyond the Study Area. If the Proposed Action does increase the rate or amount of urbanization in Dakota County, an impact would be the increased traffic entering St. Paul. Traffic fore- casts indicate that seven percent of the traffic gen- erated on the Proposed Action south of proposed 1-494 would enter the St. Paul Central Business District and another 28 percent would go to various destinations throughout the remainder of St. Paul. The traffic increase would have varying impacts depending on the status of the section of proposed I-35E in St. Paul. Not constructing I-35E in St. Paul, but constructing the Proposed Action in Dakota County, could result in an overloading of the St. Paul street system by the combined city traffic and the Dakota County generated traffic. Among the streets impacted most would be Shepard Road, West 7th Street, Lexington Avenue, and Snelling Avenue. The construction of 1-35E in St. Paul would reduce impacts on local streets by removing some of the local generated traffic. Not constructing either of the proposed sections would reduce the Dakota County generated impacts to the St. Paul city streets. Much of the Dakota County traf- fic would be diverted from the proposed I-35E corridor to widely scattered alternate routes and river cross- ings to reach their destinations. As the alternate routes become congested, reduced accessibility could become a factor to reduce the amount of urbanization in Dakota County. A more thorough discussion of the impacts of construc- tion of 1-35E in St. Paul will be addressed in a separ- ate Environmental Impact Statement. Energy Use The exact energy use impacts that the Proposed Action would generate are difficult to predict. Some general trends, however, are apparent. The smooth traffic flow and absence of steep grades of a freeway enable vehicles to be more fuel efficient by traveling at steadier speeds. Studies indicate that driving on a freeway uses 20 percent less fuel than driving the same distance on at -grade arterial streets with traffic signals. Estimates indicate that each I percent shift from at -grade arterials to new freeways results in a national fuel savings of 0.1 percent. Building a new freeway in a rapidly growing area, how- ever, might generate more highway use that would offset any gains from more efficient operation. But usage generation is difficult to quantify because movement needs are dependent on more than highway availability and quality. The Proposed Action would encourage low density, single-family housing. This type of housing is less efficient in fuel use than multi -family housing or than apartments. Low density housing discourages the use of energy efficient mass transit systems because they are then too inefficient to be worth im- plementing. The Study Area has and will continue to have low population density. The year 2000 density will probably be about 2,400 people per square mile. Transit will therefore be a supplementary mode rather than a prime mover. Auto dependence will probably be high. Construction of the Proposed Action would also require fuel for construction materials, operations, and equip- ment. For a more complete discussion of energy use see Transportation Planning Report For I-35E in Dakota County, Minnesota Highway Department. April 1976 pp. 60-68. Robert Hustad, "Mass Transit Impact on Energy Consumption," S.A.E. Special Report 383, July 1973. SEM`t�DCDN1 OV THE PROBABLE ADVERSE EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED Relocation Property Acquisition Water Resources Vegetation and Wildlife Aesthetics Section III discussed the significant impacts of the Proposed Action. This section will reiterate the probable adverse impacts which could not be avoided or reduced to acceptable levels. Residents from four homes have already been relocated. Alternative Al would require purchasing an additional 20 residences, and Alternative A2 would require pur- chasing an additional 25 residences. The actual costs that residents incur during relocation would be reim- bursed. The social impact of forced relocation, how- ever, is impossible to quantify and would probably not be fully mitigated. The impacts of the Proposed Action on the residents' established life patterns would not be reduced to an acceptable level in all cases. Alternative Al would require purchasing 132 properties, and Alternative A2 would require purchasing 134 pro- perties. The property owners would be reimbursed for the full market value of the property, but they would not be reimbursed for any direct or indirect social or economic impacts such as foreclosing the option of future income from their property or for any dis- ruption of their plans. The most significant impact to water resources would be the direct displacement of wetlands. 0f approxi- mately 2,300 acres of wetlands in the Study Area, approximately 28 acres would fall within the corridor of the Proposed Action and would be filled or altered. The Proposed Action would require reshaping 280 acres of woodlands, 400 acres of grasslands, and 29 acres of wetlands, and would be an unavoidable reduction of wildlife habitat. The impact would be the greatest to the larger animals which cannot adapt to the pre- sence of the highway or the loss of habitat. The Proposed Action would be a visual intrusion. Post construction landscaping would not fully mitigate the loss of existing natural features. 98 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOCAL SHORT-TERM USES OF MAN'S ENVIRONMENT AND THE MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENT OF LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY Short -Term A major impact in the construction of a highway is the relocation of people and businesses. The Pro- posed Action would require the relocation of people from 20 to 25 residences. It would not impact any businesses. Several impacts would occur all through the construc- tion period. Construction equipment and activities would cause localized air and noise pollution. By- passes and temporary lane closures would disrupt traffic on local streets. Relocation of gas, sewer, water, and electricity lines may cause a temporary disruption of service. An immediate Toss would occur to the tax base and would be directly proportional to the amount of land needed for right of way. Long -Term A significant long term loss to the environment would be the loss of vegetation and wetlands as wildlife habitat. An immediate Toss would occur during con- struction. Subsequent losses would occur with increased urban development. Because the Study Area is in an ur- banizing area, close to the central cities, the urban development appears inevitable. The Proposed Action, however, would likely accelerate the urban growth. The Proposed Action would convert the land use of almost 1200 acres of land that could otherwise be used for farming, homes, commercial or industrial facilities, or open space. Noise increases along the corridor would be a long term impact to adjacent properties. The noise would be a parameter needing consideration during future develop- ment. The immediate gains of safety, capacity, and time savings would continue as long-term benefits. The design would consider the future growth of the area and would antici- pate the long-term need. The design would avoid early obsolescence of the highway. The Proposed Action would provide better access for the residents to a wide array of cultural, social, economic and employment opportunities. 100 The Tong -term increase in value to the remaining tax base would more than offset the short-term loss from removal of 1200 acres of taxable lands. The long-term benefits of helping to place urban growth in its proper perspective within the Metropolitan Re- gion would aid in the implementation of the Metropolitan Development planning process and should outweigh the losses of both the short-term impacts and the long-term impacts through more efficient use or urban services and resources. IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES IRREVERSIBLE $ IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES The magnitude of the Proposed Action indicates a sig- nificant commitment of resources including: I. The land required for right of way, including the freeway corridor proper, allied facilities such as interchanges and separations, and excess right of way not suitable to redevelopment. 2. Displacement of residences and utilities. 3. The material for construction such as steel, energy, cement, aggregate, and soil. 4. Manpower used in the design, construction, and maintenance. 5. Funds to design, construct, and maintain the highway. Freeways also encourage specialized transportation related developments in the areas adjacent to the them. The freeway may facilitate the transition of land to other uses, but the community ultimately controls land use. The improved accessibility that the Proposed Action would provide would increase the options for develop- ment. 104 APPIENEDOX lik • MINNESOTA HISTORICAL SOCIETY W. C. P. Kachelmyer Preliminary Design Engineer 612E Highway Building St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 Dear Mr, Kachelmyer: 690 Cedar Street, St. Paul, Minnesota •S101 • 612-2SE-2747 13 February 1976 RE: S.P. 1982 (T.H. 35E) From 0.4 Mi. S. of CSAH 26 in Eagan to T.H. 110 in Mendota Heights Both the Survey and Planning section and the Highway Archaeology section of the Minnesota Historical Society have reviewed the project described above pursuant to the State Historic Preservation Officer's responsibilities under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Executive Order 11593, and Advisory Council Procedures 36 CFR 800. This review enalyzed the project area for the existence of historic, archaeological, architectural, and cultural sites which are on or are eligible for inclusion on the National Registerof Historic Places. Neither sites on nor sites eligible for inclusion on the Register have been found in the area. Therefore, no sites within the jurisdiction of any of the laws and regulations mentioned above will be affected by the proposed project. So as to avoid any later questions I am anxious particularly to point out that neither the Mendota Historic District nor the Fort Snelling Historic District will be affected by the highway described above. Thank you for your continued attention to historic preservation values in your planning process. RWF/fr Sincerely, Russell W. Fridley State Historic Preservation Officer Founded 1849 • The oldest institution in the state r1 ,y i ,,,,� MINNESOTA HISTORICAL SOCIETY (05 Cedar Street, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 • 612296-2747 i� rlbruary 1976 Mr. C.P. Kachelmyer Preliminary Design Engineer 612E Highway Building St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 Dear Mr. Kachelmyer: RE: S.P. 1982 (T.H. 35E) From Jct T.H. 35 and T.H. 35W In Burnsville to 0.4 Mi. S. of CSAH 26 in Eagan Dakota County Both the Survey and Planning section and the Highway Archaeology section of the Minnesota Historical Society have reviewed the project described above pursuant to the State Historic Preservation Officer's responsibilities under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Executive Order 11593, and Advisory Council Procedures 36 CFR 800. This review analyzed the project area for the existence of historic, archaeological, architectural, and cultural sites which are on or are eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places. Neither sites on nor sites eligible for inclusion on the Register have been found in the area. Therefore, no sites within the jurisdiction of any of the laws and regulations mentioned above will be affected by the proposed project. So as to avoid any later questions I am anxious particularly to point out that neither the Mendota Historic District nor the Fort Snelling Historic District will be affected by the highway described above. Thank you for your continued attention to historic preservation values in your planning process. RWF/fr Sincerely, ussell W. Fridley State Historic Preservation Officer Founded 1849 • The oldest institution in the state APP[LL G�100X la SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS Aesthetic Evaluation and Landscape Concept, 1-35E in Dakota County. Minnesota Highway Department, Office of Environmental Services. St. Paul: 1975. 27 pp. Air Quality Report, S.P. 1982 (I-35E). Minnesota Highway Department, District Nine Resource Section. Oakdale, Minnesota: February 1976. 21 pp. Ground Water Data for Environmental Impact Statement, S.P. 1982 (1-35E). Minnesota Highway Department, Materials Section, Geology Unit. St. Paul, Minnesota: October 1975. 3 pp. Interstate 35E Bedrock and Glacial Geology Study for Environmental Impact Statement, Northern Dakota County. Minnesota Highway Department, District Nine Preliminary Design Section, Oakdale, Minnesota: April 1976. 6 pp. I-35E Dakota County Social Economic Report. Minnesota Highway Department, District Nine Resource Section, Socio-Economic Unit. Oakdale, Minnesota: January 1976. 85 pp. Noise Analysis Report, S.P. 1982 (1-35E). Minnesota Highway Department, District Nine Resource Section. Oakdale, Minnesota: February 1976. 41 pp. Preliminary Hydraulics & Water Quality Analysis for 1-35E. Minnesota Highway Department, District Nine Hydraulics Section. Oakdale, Minnesota: March 1976. 52 pp. Right of Way Acquisition and Relocation. Minnesota Highway Department, District Nine Right of Way Section. Oakdale, Minnesota: May 1976. 33 pp. Comprehensive Traffic Report, FAI-35E System Planning Analysis Report, M-177. Minnesota Highway Department, Office of System Planning. St. Paul: April 1976. 94 pp. Transportation Information and Attitude Survey for Interstate 35E in Dakota County, Minnesota. Minnesota Highway Department, District Nine Resource Section. Oakdale, Minnesota: January 1976. 85 pp. Transportation Planning Report for I-35E in Dakota County. Minnesota Highway Department, District Nine Resource Section, Transportation Planning Unit. Oakdale, Minnesota: April 1976. 92 pp. Vegetation, Surface Water & Wildlife Review of Proposed I-35E Through Eagan, Mendota Heights, Burnsville & Apple Valley. Minnesota Highway Department, Office of Environmental Services. St. Paul: September 1975. 42 pp. These reports are available at: Minnesota Highway Department --District Nine 3485 Hadley Ave. No. P. 0. Box 2050 No. St. Paul, Minnesota 55109 Phone: 612-770-2311 110 r ri,or ,St,1111k241 pAcrel &,514.(s„iii-44,t‘t S. << iu - if' I a h,. ,,5 - lor h \4. rS 1=(4d41U ot q. r5 135E REPORT Proposed Link From West Seventh Street To Capitol Approach Saint Paul, Minnesota Prepared For Minnesota Department Of Highways B y Walter Butler Engineering Co., Inc. And Tuncay M. Aydinalp P.E. Consulting Engineers March 1975 I-35E REPORT PROPOSED WEST 7TH STREET TO CAPITOL APPROACH SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA Prepared For The Minnesota Department of Highways Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155 By Walter Butler Engineering Company, Inc. 175 Aurora Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55103 (612) 224-1871 And Tuncay M. Aydinalp, P. E. Consulting Engineer 1900 Hennepin Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnesota 55403 (612) 871-4101 March 1975 STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS ST. PAUL, MINN. 55155 The following study and report have been conducted and prepared by an independent consulting firm under the financing of the Minnesota Highway Department. Conclusions and recommendations made within this report are strictly those of the Consultant arrived at through his study process. The Minnesota Highway Department neither endorses nor rejects these conclusions or recommendations, but accepts the report as input for preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the subject project. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING REPORT WAS PREPARED BY US OR UNDER OUR DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT WE ARE DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. Tuncay M. ydinalp, Project Di ector Minn. Reg. No. 7154 Godfrey Love V P. Asst. Project Director Minn. Reg. No. 4817 February 14, 1975 i PREFACE Although criteria for the preparation of Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) for Highways served as a guide, this Report is not an EIS on the proposed link of I-35E from West 7th St. to the Capitol Approach Complex in the City of St. Paul, Minnesota. Rather, it is a document that presents data, analyses, findings, and recommendations reflecting the best judgments of the Consultant, acting as an independent and impartial third party between proponents and opponents of the subject project. This work is the result of tax -supported research and is not copyrightable. It may be reprinted freely with the customary crediting of the source. The study effort was under the direction of Mr. Tuncay M. Aydinalp, P. E. , initially as an employee of the Walter Butler Engineering Company, Inc. , and then as a co -Consultant on the project. Mr. Godfrey Love, P. E. served as assistant project director. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS To play the role of an independent and impartial third party in a heated issue with even the least degree of success requires the cooperation, under- standing and contributions of a wide array of persons. To do so in a manner where respect and trust prevail even when views differ is more demanding yet. Speaking from the Consultant's side, we are fortunate to have not lacked for any of these from the parties involved. For this, we express our appreciation to the steering committee of RIP 35E (Residents in Protest over I-35E), with whom we met almost weekly for over 5 months. We may not have always agreed on all issues, but our impression is that mutual respect prevailed as a rule. In this connection, we are indebted to D. Felder, F. Martin, M. McKim and J. Wengler, who chaired many of the meetings, for their general fair-mindedness. From the City of St. Paul, we acknowledge the efforts of members of the Mayor's Advisory Committee on I-35E and the Departments of Public Works and Parks and Recreation in assisting us in the acquisition of relevant data. Our thanks also go to the Dakota County Engineer's Office for their aid in obtaining public input to the Report from the County and its municipalities. The Minnesota Department of Highways rate our appreciation for respecting the independence of the Consultant and for their general cooperation. From the iii then Commissioner, R. Lappegaard, on down, there was never any attempt, implied or otherwise, to influence the Consultant in any way. In this regard, the freedom and latitude we enjoyed was total. In the private sector, we are grateful for the efforts of R. F. Van Hoef, V. P. of the First National Bank of St. Paul and a member of Operation 85, a City Civic Group, and of Iry Timm of the St. Paul Chamber of Commerce for their work in getting the Community involved in the project. Finally, a personal note of gratitude goes to Ms. B. Krogseng for her efforts in typing this Report with great diligence. T. M. A. March, 1975 iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface ii Acknowledgments iii A. B. c. INTRODUCTION A-1 - A-6 SUMMkRY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS B-1 - B-19 REPORT UPDATE C-1 - C-25 I. THE PROPOSED PROJECT I -a - I-j I- 1 - 1-86 II. PROBABLE EFFECTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT II -a - II-i II-1 - II- 65 III. PUBLIC INPUT TO REPORT III -a - III-d III-1 - III-15 IV. ALTERNATES AND THEIR EFFECTS IV -a - IV - j IV-1 - IV -102 V. SECTION 4(f) AND SECTION 106 V-a LAND INVOLVEMENT V-1 - V-6 VI. BIBLIOGRAPHY VI-1 - VI-5 APPENDICES APPENDIX 1 THROUGH APPENDIX 9 TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont. ) A. INTRODUCTION A-1 - A-4 I. GENERAL A-1 II. PURPOSE OF REPORT A-3 III. BASIS FOR REPORT A-4 B. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS B-1 - B-19 I. SUMMARY B-1 a. Indroduction B-1 b. Report Update B-2 c. The Proposed Project B-3 d. Probable Effects on the Environment B-5 e. Public Input to Report B-8 f. Alternates and Their Effects B-9 g. Section 4(f) and Section 106 Land Involvement B-13 II. CONCLUSIONS B-14 III. RECOMMENDATIONS B-16 IV. COMMENTARY B-18 C. REPORT UPDATE C-1 - C-25 I. GENERAL II. UPDATE ITEMS a. Items of Genera 1 Significance 1. Population Projection Changes 2. Motor Fuel Supply 3. Inflation b. Items of Specific Significance 1 Section I Update 2. Section II Update 3. Section IV Update III. COMMENTARY SECTION i - THE PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT C-1 C-1 C-1 C-1 C-4 C-5 C-8 C-8 C-10 C-19 C-24 Table of Contents I -a List of Tables I-b - I-c List of Figures I-d - I-e Section Summary I-f Comments I-j vi I, THE PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT I-1 - 1-86 A. GENERAL I- 1 B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION I-5 1. The Proposed Highway and Its Elements I-5 2. Topography, Geology and Land Use I- 17 a. Topography and Geology I- 17 b. Land Use I-20 3. Purpose and Need I-30 a. Metropolitan Considerations I-32 1. Area Notes I-32 2. Metropolitan Travel Demand I-41 b. City of Saint Paul Considerations I-55 1. Neighborhoods Served I-55 2. The Central Business District 1-57 3. Transportation I-61 4. Regional and Community Benefits I-69 a. Economic Impact I-69 b. Traffic Safety and Congestion Relief I-77 c. Investments I- 79 d. Mobility I-79 5. History of Project I-81 6. Current Status of Project 1-85 SECTION II - PROBABLE EFFECTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT Table of Contents II -a List of Tables II-b List of Figures II-c Section Summary II-d Comments II-i II. PROBABLE EFFECTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT II-1 - II-65 A. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS II-1 1 Noise Pollution II-2 2. Air Quality II-20 3. Vibration II- 31 4. Slope Stability on the Bluff Area II-33 5. Effects on Area Vegetation II-39 6. Aesthetics II-40 7. Water Pollution II-42 B. SOCIO-ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS II-45 1 Neighborhood Disruption II-45 2. Displacement of Families and Businesses I1-50 3. Loss in Property Values (Or Gains) II-52 vii 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont. ) 4. Effects on Historic Sites 11-55 5. Effects on Hospitals I1-59 6. Effects on Parks and Playgrounds TI-60 7. Effects on Churches 1I-61 8. Effects on Schools 1I-62 C. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR SUMMARY II-64 SECTION III - PUBLIC INPUT TO REPORT Table of Contents III -a List of Tables III-b Section Summary IIT-c Comments III-d III. PUBLIC INPUT TO REPORT III-1 - III- 15 I A. GENERAL III-1 B. CONSULTANT'S TASKS II1-2 C. PUBLIC CONTACTS III-4 D. RESULTS OF PUBLIC INPUT III- 14 , SECTION IV - ALTERNATES AND THEIR EFFECTS Table of Contents IV -a - IV-b List of Tables IV-c List of Figures IV-d Section Summary IV-e Comments IV - j IV. ALTERNATES AND THEIR EFFECTS IV-1 - IV-102 A. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE ALTERNATES IV-1 i B. CRITERIA USED IN THE EVALUATION OF IV-9 ALTERNATES C. ANALYSES OF ALTERNATES IV-14 I 1. Alternate 1 IV - 15 a. City of St. Paul Effects IV-17 b. Dakota County Effects IV-20 I c. Conclusion IV-21 2. Alternate 2 IV-22 a. City of St. Paul Effects IV-24 I b. Dakota County Effects IV-32 c. Conclusion IV-33 3. Alternate 3 IV-34 1 a. City of St. Paul Effects IV-35 b. Dakota County Effects IV-46 c. Conclusion IV-47 1 viii 1 4. Alternate 4 a. City of St. Paul Effects b. Dakota County Effects c. Conclusion 5. Alternate 5 a. City of St. Paul Effects b. Dakota County Effects c. Conclusion 6. Alternate 6 a. City of St. Paul Effects b. Dakota County Effects c. Conclusion 7. Alternate 7 D. COMPARISON OF ALTERNATES 1. General 2. Conceptual Acceptability 3. Estimated Costs and Benefits of Alternates 2, 3, 4 and 5 4. Criteria Satisfaction Levels IV - 48 IV-50 TV-55 IV-56 IV-57 IV-58 IV - 67 IV-72 IV-74 IV-77 TV-78 IV-80 IV-81 IV-83 TV-83 IV - 84 IV-90 IV-101 SECTION V - SECTION 4(f) AND SECTION 106 LAND INVOLVEMENT Table of Contents V-a V. SECTION 4(f) AND SECTION 106 LAND INVOLVEMENT V-1 - V-6 A. SECTION 4(f) INVOLVEMENT 1 Pleasant Ave. Corridor - Alt. 2, 3 2 Shepard Road Corridor - Alt. 4 3 T. H. 3 Corridor - Alt. 5 B. SECTION 106 INVOLVEMENT 1. Pleasant Ave. Corridor - Alt. 2, 3 2. Shepard Road Corridor - Alt. 4 3. T. H. 3 Corridor - Alt. 5 V-1 V-3 V-3 V-3 V-4 V-4 V-6 V-6 SECTION VI - BIBLIOGRAPHY VI-1 - VI-5 APPENDICES Appendix 1 Survey of City of Saint Paul Central Business A. 1-1 - A. 1-34 District Leaders Regarding Proposed I-35E 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont. ) Appendix 2 Presentation on Interstate Highway 35E from West Seventh Street to the Capitol Approach Complex by William C. Merritt, Chief Engineer, District 9, Minnesota Department of Highways Appendix 3 Preliminary Statement by Residents in Protest over I-35E (RIP 35E) Appendix 4 Statements and/or Resolutions by City of Saint Paul Organizations Regarding Proposed I-35E Appendix 5 Statements and/or Resolutions by Dakota County Public Bodies Regarding Proposed I-35E Appendix 6 Statement by United Hospitals, Inc. Regarding Their Concern About Noise Pollution, Vibration, and Air Pollution from Proposed I-35E Appendix 7 Appendix 8 Resolutions and Correspondence Regarding Parks and Playgrounds Affected by Proposed I-35E (West 7th Street to Capitol Approach Complex) United States Census Data, 1950 - 1970 for Census Tracts Near Proposed I-35E in Saint Paul A. 2-1 - A. 2-4 A. 3-1 - A. 3-27 A.4-1 - A.4-5 A. 5-1 - A. 5-16 A. 6-1 - A. 6-7 A. 7-1 - A. 7-5 A. 8-1 - A. 8-28 Appendix 9 Air Quality and Water Quality Data A. 9-1 - A. 9-8 x LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE C - 1 I - 1 ST. PAUL - MINNEAPOLIS METROPOLITAN AREA POPULATION PROJECTIONS (1980, 1990, 2000) C - 3 SUMMARY OF PROPOSED MAINLINE I - 10 ROADWAY ELEMENTS I - 2 ST. PAUL RESIDENTIAL ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS I - 20 I - 3a PARKS IN I-35E LINK AREA I - 27 I - 3b PLAYGROUNDS IN I-35E LINK AREA I - 28 I - 4 AVERAGE DAILY TRAVEL FORECASTS I - 31 ON I-35E LINK I - 5 FORECASTS OF METROPOLITAN AREA TRAVEL CHARACTERISTICS I - 6 STANDARD METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREA (SMSA) TRAVEL CHARACTERISTICS I - 7 STATE OF MINNESOTA POPULATION, OPERATOR'S LICENSES AND VEHICLE REGISTRATIONS I - 8 SEVEN -COUNTY METROPOLITAN AREA POPULATION AND VEHICLE REGISTRATIONS I - 9 OFFICE SPACE AND EMPLOYMENT FORECASTS FOR THE SAINT PAUL CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT 1970, 1980, 1990 I - 44 I - 46 I - 49 I - 50 I - 58 I - 10 ST. PAUL ARTERIAL STREET TRAFFIC I - 62 VOLUMES I 11 RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUIRED FOR I-35E I - 72 IN SAINT PAUL I - 12 TAX DATA ON RESIDENTIAL REAL ESTATE I - 73 FOR PROPERTIES IN WARD 5, CITY OF SAINT PAUL xi t LIST OF TABLES (Cont. ) TABLE PAGE I - 13 RIGHT-OF-WAY PURCHASES AND REAL ESTATE TAXES I - 14 CITY OF SAINT PAUL VALUATIONS I - 15 CITY OF SAINT PAUL COUNCIL ACTIONS II - 1 FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION (FHWA) DESIGN NOISE GUIDELINES II - 2 NOISE EFFECTS ALONG I-35E LINK WEST 7TH STREET TO I-94 JUNCTION II - 3 EFFECTIVENESS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE EMMITSSION CONTROL PROGRAM EMISSION FACTORS FOR VEHICLES USING FREEWAYS (ARB) - 5% HDV MIX EMISSION FACTORS FOR VEHICLES USING CITY STREETS (EPA) - 5% HDV MIX 1972 AIR QUALITY MEASUREMENTS FOR CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBONS AND NITROGEN OXIDES, SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA II - 7 ESTIMATED CARBON MONOXIDE (CO) EivIISSIONS CAUSED BY TRAVEL ON PROPOSED I-35E II - 8 ANALYSIS OF FLOW, SALT APPLIED AND SALT DISCHARGED, JOHN F. KENNEDY EXPRESSWAY, FEBRUARY 23 TO APRIL 6, 1967 II - 9 PROPOSED I-35E PROJECT AREA ENVIRONMENTAL SCORE SHEET III - 1 CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF ALL CONSULTANT MEETINGS WITH PUBLIC PARTIES AND SELECTED GOVERNMENT .AGENCIES I- 74 II - 16 iI - 21 II - 24 II - 25 II - 27 II - 29 II - 43 II - 65 III-7 - III-8 xii TABLE III - 2 III - 3 III - 4 III - 5 PAGE LIST OF CONSULTANT MEETINGS WITH III - 9 RESIDENTS IN PROTEST OVER I-35E (RIP 35E) LIST OF CONSULTANT CONTACTS WITH OFFICIALS OF HOSPITALS AND DISCUSSIONS WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF NURSING AND BOARDING CARE HOMES ALONG THE PROPOSED I-35E ROUTE IN SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA LIST OF CONSULTANT MEETINGS WITH CITY OF SAINT PAUL ORGANIZATIONS AND/OR R EPR ESENTATIV ES LIST OF CONSULTANT MEETINGS WITH PUBLIC AND PRIVATE PARTIES IN DAKOTA COUNTY III - 6 LIST OF CONSULTANT MEETINGS WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF CITY OF SAINT PAUL AND OF METROPOLITAN GOVERNMENT IV - 1 IV - 2 IV - 3 IV - 4 IV - 5 IV-6 IV - 7 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF PROPOSED I-35E AND ALTERNATES ESTIMATED SOCIAL COSTS FOR ALTERNATE 2 IN PLEASANT AVENUE CORRIDOR ESTIMATED SOCIAL COSTS FOR ALTERNATE 3 IN PLEASANT AVENUE CORRIDOR TWIN CITY METROPOLITAN AREA FREEWAY COST ESTIMATES ESTIMATED COSTS IN PLEASANT AVE. ESTIMATED COSTS - BENEFITS FOR I-35E CORRIDOR - ALT. 2 - BENEFITS FOR I-35E IN PLEASANT AVE. CORRIDOR - ALT. 3 ESTIMATED COSTS - BENEFITS FOR I-35E IN SHEPARD ROAD CORRIDOR - ALT. 4 III- 13 IV - 6 IV - 30 IV - 44 IV - 92 IV - 93 IV - 94 IV - 96 LIST OF TABLES (Cont. ) TABLE PAGE IV - 8 IV - 9 ESTIMATED COSTS - BENEFITS FOR I-35E IN T. H. 3 CORRIDOR - ALT. 5 (Ramsey County Only) IV - 98 CRITERIA SATISFACTION COMPARISON TV - 10Z ALT. 1 THROUGH ALT. 6 xiv t LIST OF PLATES AND FIGURES Page Plate A Limits of Construction on Proposed I-35E as A - 5 of April, 1973 Plate B Proposed I-35E near West 7th St. and Existing A - 6 Shepard Road Alignment into St. Paul Business District Plate C Copy of City Council of St. Paul Resolution No. 264827, January 2, 1975, Regarding Proposed I-35E C - 21 Plate D Copy of RIP-35E Citizen Group's Proposal - C - 22 PARKWAY NOW - Submitted to the City of C - 23 St. Paul in December, 1974 Figure 1 National System of Interstate and Defense I - 2 Highways Figure 2 State of Minnesota Freeway System I - 3 Figure 3 Proposed Twin Cities Freeway Network I - 4 and Project Area Figure 4 General Plan of Proposed I-35E from West I - 7 7th St. to the I- 94 Junction in the Capitol Approach Complex, St. Paul, Minnesota Figure 5 Proposed I-35E Link Superimposed on I - 8 Aerial Photographs Figure 6 Plan View of Proposed I-35E from West 7th I - 11 Street to Jefferson Avenue Figure 7 Plan View of Proposed I-35E from Jefferson I - 13 Avenue to St. Clair Avenue Figure 8 Plan View of Proposed I-35E from St. Clair I - 14 Avenue to Kellogg Boulevard xv List of Plates and Figures (cont. ) Figure 9 Plan View of I-35E and I-94 Junction at Capitol Approach Complex Figure 10 U.S. Geological Survey Map of Project Area Figure 11 Zoning Map for Project Area Figure 12 Historical Hill District Limits Designated By 1973 Minnesota State Legislature Figure 13 City of Saint Paul Median Income Profile Figure 14 Housing Values by Block in Selected Parts of Census Tracts 357 and 358 Figure 15 Saint Paul Public School Attendance Boundaries, 1972 Figure 16 The Seven -County Metropolitan Area of the Twin Cities Figure 17 Population Forecasts for the Total Metropolitan Area, and the Cities of Saint Paul and Minneapolis Figure 18 Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Population Forecasts by County Figure 19 Employment Distribution in Selected Parts of the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area (Source: Metropolitan Council and U. S. Census (1970)) Figure 20 Person Trips by Mode and Time of Day (Source: Metropolitan Council) Figure 21 Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Person -Trip Distribution (Source: Metropolitan Council) Page I - 16 I - 25 I - 26 I-29 I - 34 I - 37 I - 37 i - 38 I - 43 I - 43 xvi Figure 22 Stratification of Person Trips Per Day As A Function of Population and Automobile Ownership in Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas (SMSA) (Source: Peat, Marwick, Livingston and Co. ) Figure 23 Travel in Project Area and Saint Paul Central Business District, 1972 (Source: City of Saint Paul Traffic Map) Figure 24 Travel Forecasts for 1985 with Do -Nothing Alternative Figure 25 Travel Forecasts for 1985 - Alternative 2 Figure 26 a. Limits of Audibility b. Continuous Ambient Noise Levels by Land Use c. Average Highway Noise Levels by Vehicle Type d. Median Highway Noise Level Estimates Figure 27 a. Sources of Truck Noise b. Passenger Car Noise at 50 ft. c. Motorcycle and Sports Car Noise Figure 28 Noise Level Dissipation from 6-lane Highway Figure 29 Noise Level Dissipation from 8-lane Highway Figure 30 70 Decibel Noise Limits in Project Area Figure 31 Carbon Monoxide, Hydrocarbon, and Nitrogen Oxide Emissions from Vehicles Figure 32 Minneapolis -St. Paul Area Wind Roses Figure 33 Pleasant Ave. Test Cut Location Figure 34 Three Problem Areas Studied for Soil Stability Figure 35 Location Map for Alternates 2 - 6 Figure 36 Aerial Photograph of Alternates 2 - 6 Page I - 46 I - 64 I - 65 I - 66 II - 5 II - 5 II - 6 II - 6 II - 9 II - 10 II - 10 II - 11 II - 12 II - 15 II - 23 II - 30 II - 35 II - 36 IV-3 IV - 4 xvii List of Plates and Figures (cont. ) Figure 37 Travel Forecasts for 1985 - Alt. 1 Figure 38 Travel Forecasts for 1985 - Alt. 2 Figure 39 Travel Forecasts for 1985 - Alt. 3 Figure 40 Travel Forecasts for 1985 - Alt. 4 Figure 41 Travel Forecasts for 1985 in Pleasant Ave. Corridor - Alt. 5 Figure 42 Travel Forecasts for 1985 in Dakota County - Alt. 5 Figure 43 Location Map for I-35E Connection from East 7th St. to I-35E North Figure 44 Land Use Map for West St. Paul Figure 45 Zoning Map for South St. Paul Figure 46 Limits of Urbanization for Twin Cities Metropolitan Area - 1990 Figure 47 Travel Forecasts for 1985 - Alt. 6 Page IV - 17 IV - 25 IV - 37 IV - 52 IV - 59 IV - 60 IV - 63 IV - 70 IV - 71 IV - 76 IV - 79 1 xviii i A. INTRODUCTION I. GENERAL This Report presents a locational and environmental analysis of the proposed 3. 7-mile long F. A. I-35E link in the City of St. Paul, Minnesota, between West 7th St. and the I-35E - I-94 junction in the vicinity of the State Capitol complex. The link is situated to the southwest of the City's Central Business District (C. B. D. ) and generally follows the course of Pleasant Ave. , a former St. Paul arterial street. The proposed I-35E link in the Pleasant Ave. corridor is one on which construction work was ongoing at the time the study effort for this Report commenced in August, 1972. Work in the categories of right-of-way acquisition, clearing and grubbing, excavation and earth moving, grading, construction drainage structures, and bridge construction are at stages of completion ranging from about 40% to 90%. (Please see Plates C and D for aerial photo- graphs of the project area taken in April of 1973. ) The work stoppage on the project occurred as a result of litigation initiated by opponents of the proposed freeway. Eight citizens and four neighborhood associations opposed to I-35E construction in the Pleasant Ave. corridor and the City of St. Paul jointly filed suit against the Minnesota Department of Highways (MHD) and the United States Department of Transportation (DOT) in the Second Federal District Court in St. Paul on August 2, 1972, contending A - 1 1 that work on I-35E should stop until an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the project was prepared in accordance with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969. In this case, the City of St. Paul's role was to join in the request for the preparation of an EIS, and was not to indicate that the City opposed the project. On August 18, 1972, the Plaintiffs and the Defendants reached an Agreement whereby the suit was "dismissed without prejudice". The Agreement stipulated that an Environmental Impact Statement be prepared on the subject I-35E link. To ensure that the work for the EIS would be of an impartial nature, an independent third -party Consultant was retained. The Consultant selected on the basis of prior knowledge of the project was the Walter Butler Engineering Co. , Inc. , 175 Aurora Ave. , St. Paul, Minnesota 55103. Agreement No. 57243 between MHD and the Consultant signed on August 28, 1972 for the performance of the work represents the starting date for the study. For lack of any other participants, the initial funding for the study was by the Minnesota Department of Highways. Subsequently, the City of St. Paul and MHD jointly funded an economic survey of the City's Central Business District (C. B. D. ). The survey included the polling of persons generally in leadership positions with offices in the C. B. D. by a Research and Analysis firm, retained by the Consultant, Mid -Continent Surveys, Inc. of Minneapolis, Minnesota. This is the third and final draft of the Consultant's Report. The submittal A - 2 of the first draft was in July, 1973, with the second in March of 1974. Because of evolutionary developments in the requirements for preparing reports and studies related to Environmental Impact Statements, each draft has usually gone into items in greater detail than was the case earlier. Otherwise, the changes between the earlier drafts and this final Report are minimal. II. PURPOSE OF REPORT The purpose of this Report is to provide an independent and impartial third -party evaluation of the proposed I-35E link in the Pleasant Ave. corridor in St. Paul and its alternatives in accordance with the general requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969. In this connection, the Report attempts to identify the probable effects of proposed I-35E, if constructed, on the City of St. Paul and on the metropolitan community. Similarly, it serves to identify the probable effects of proposed I-35E construction in alternative corridors. The objective of the Report is to provide impartial comparative analyses on which to base decisions regarding the facility. Moreover, the Report represents a forum wherein the public's input to the process reflects itself in the selection of alternatives for study and in the identification of neighborhood concerns regarding I-35E construction in the Pleasant Ave. corridor. At this point, it requires noting that the Consultant did design work for the Minnesota Department of Highways in the late 1950's and early 1960's. A - 3 The work included the final design of I-35E between T. H. 110 in Dakota County and Duke St. in St. Paul. This is a point clearly explained to both proponents and opponents of the proposed project. III. BASIS FOR REPORT The base data used in the analyses presented in this Report are from both public and private sources. Necessarily, the primary sources of data are public agencies such as MHD, City of St. Paul, Metropolitan Council, etc. A selective list of sources and the data involved includes: - -Minnesota Department of Highways: History of project, plans and layouts, travel demand projections, construction costs, right-of-way limits and costs, slope stability studies, noise computations, aerial photographs. - -Metropolitan Council: Population projections, transportation planning objectives, Central Business District projections. - -City of St. Paul and Agencies: Property values, tax rates, current and past traffic counts on arterial streets, zoning maps, neighborhood data, parks and playgrounds information, air quality data. - -Dakota County and Municipalities: Land use maps, aerial photographs, transportation plans. - -Minnesota Pollution Control Agency: Noise regulation and air quality policies. - -Metropolitan Transit Commission: Mass transit policies and programs. - -United States Bureau of the Census: Census data, 1950, 1960, 1970 --United States Geological Survey: Water quality data for Mississippi River in St. Paul. - -RIP 35E Citizens Group: Selection of Alternates for study, definition (Opposed to I-35E in Pleasant Ave. corridor) of specific areas of concern. --St. Paul Chamber of Commerce: Central Business District (CBD) information. - -United Hospitals, Inc.: Noise exposure and vibration study near hospitals. In addition, the Consultant has used data compiled by Mid -Continent Sur- veys, Inc. regarding the views of persons working in the St. Paul C. B. D. A - 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 A- 5 A-6 B. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS I. SUMMARY a. Introduction This Report presents a locational and environmental analysis of the proposed 3. 7 mile long I-35E link between West 7th St. and the I-94 junction in the vicinity of the State Capitol Approach Complex in the City of St. Paul, Minnesota. The link follows the course of former Pleasant Ave. , a City arterial street, from which the transportation corridor derives its name. The proposed link is one which was under construction when citizens groups representing neighborhoods along portions of it initiated litigation against MHD and DOT to stop work on the project until an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was prepared. The City of St. Paul joined in the litigation calling for the EIS in accordance with the requirements of the National Environ- mental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969. In August of 1972, the suit was dismissed without prejudice when the defendants agreed to prepare an EIS. The Minnesota Department of Highways selected the Walter Butler Engineering Company, Inc. , 175 Aurora Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota 55103, as an independent third -party Consultant to prepare a Report on the project on the basis of prior knowledge, having performed design work for MHD in the late 1950's and early 1960's on I-35E from T. H. 110 in Dakota County to Duke St. in St. Paul. This has been clearly stated to B - 1 parties who originated the suit. The purpose of the Report is to evaluate the impact of proposed I-35E in the Pleasant Ave. corridor as well as in alternate corridors. In addition, the Report attempts to reflect the input of the public -at -large. b. Report Update Since August of 1972, when work on the study effort for this Report commenced, developments of both general and specific significance have taken place. The items of general significance relate to reductions in Metropolitan Council population projections for the future years; motor fuel supplies; and inflation. With respect to these items, the data show that while population estimates for the year 2000 are 2, 888, 000, or 9. 1% less than the 3, 176, 300 person estimates 2 years earlier. However, the changes total 3, 950 (0. 63%) and 1, 650 (0. 39%) respectively for Dakota County and Ramsey County (very negli- gible changes). The effects of motor fuel supplies are indeterminate. Inflation has resulted in 1975 highway construction costs about 45% to 50% higher than those in 1972. With allowances for the monies already spent, the new cost estimate for the proposed project is approximately $68, 200, 000 (includes social costs). The update of items of specific significance are presented by Sections B - 2 as they appear in the Report. The most notable items of change are noise pollution, vibration studies, and slope stability on the bluff area. In noise, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has established noise standards considerably more stringent than those recommended by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) of the United States Department of Transportation (DOT). It is unlikely that freeway -generated noise can satisfy the MPCA standards. In vibration, United Hospitals, Inc. and MHD have cooperated in a study of vibration near the hospitals. It appears there will not be any noticeable effects from the proposed freeway. In the slope stability on the bluff problem, there have been additional correspondences between MHD and their Consultants. The indications are that the hillside near the Chancery area will be more stable than is the case currently. c. The Proposed Project The proposed 3. 7-mile long I-35E link in the Pleasant Ave. corridor is the only stretch of the interstate highway yet -to -be constructed in the City of St. Paul. It is a 6-lane, 50 m. p. h. facility, with an estimated total cost of $52, 000, 000 (1972 figure). The sum includes $23, 600, 000 already expended and the estimated cost of modifications required for weaving improvements at its junction with I-94 in the Capitol Approach Complex. The link includes 5 B - 3 interchanges, 15 ramps, 15 highway bridges, 1 railroad bridge, and 3 pedestrian bridges. The purpose of proposed I-35E is to provide a connection between I-35 and the City of St. Paul just as I-35W connects the I-35 to the City of Minneapolis. The premise for I-35E and I-35W at the earliest stages of interstate highway planning was to provide comparable levels of access to the 2 major cities of the Twin Cities metropolitan area, as well as to attempt: to provide a balance between the easterly and westerly counties of the 7-county area. In this connection, proposed I-35E was a highway especially important to the develop- ment plans for the northerly and westerly parts of Dakota County, one of the 2 fastest growing counties of the metropolitan community. In travel demand, the indications are that 60, 000 to 75, 000 vehicles per day will use I-35E along the Pleasant Ave. link in 1985. The data suggest that the majority of the link users are likely to be St. Paulites from the area to the southwest of the Ci.ty's C. B. D. A major reason advanced for I-35E construction in the Pleasant Ave. corridor is that it will relieve congestion on the north -south oriented arterial streets in the project area. The currently proposed I-35E alignment traverses sparsely populated hillsides; areas with poor, peaty soils; courses representing the divide between 2 distinct St. Paul neighborhoods; sensitive land use areas which include health care facilities. It also passes near the boundaries of a State - designated (1973) historic hill district. The 2 neighborhoods along whose B - 4 divide proposed I-35E would be situated are the relatively affluent professional - managerial "bluff" neighborhood - Summit -Hill district - and the lower -income "flats" area neighborhood. Census data suggest that the neighborhoods have very different charac- teristics and to -date have not had much interaction with one another. d. Probable Effects on the Environment Like any other urban freeway, the probable physical and socio-economic effects are many. The items identified for study are 7 physical and 8 socio- economic environmental factors. The 7 physical environmental factors relate to 1) Noise Pollution, 2) Air Quality, 3) Vibration, 4) Slope Stability on the Bluff Area, 5) Effects on Area Vegetation, 6) Aesthetics and 7) Water Pollution. The 8 socio-economic environmental factors relate to 1) Neighborhood Disruption, 2) Displacement of Families and Businesses, 3) Loss in Property Values (or Gains), 4) Effects on Historic Sites, 5) Effects on Hospitals, 6) Effects on Parks, 7) Effects on Churches and 8) Effects on Schools. Of the categories listed above, it appears that the areas of greatest citizen concern are 1) Noise Pollution, 2) Air Quality, 3) Vibration, 4) Slope Stability on the Bluff Area, 5) Neighborhood Disruption, 6) Loss in Property Values, 7) Effects on Historic Sites, and 8) Effects on Hospitals. St. Clair Ave. to Grand Ave. - Ramsey St. in that order. e. Public Input to Report To obtain public input to the Report, the Consultant has attended over 50 meetings with groups interested in the proposed I-35E project. It was the Consultant's opinion that for the study effort to be meaningful, establishing credibility as an impartial third party; acquainting the interested parties with the fundamentals of the transportation planning process, and seeking out as broad a public input base as possible were essential elements. (The premise for this belief was that any traces of distrust on the parts of the parties involved had to be minimized, if not dispelled.) In this connection, the Consultant had over 100 telephone contacts and received over 25 correspondences with interested parties. In general, the interested groups met with the Consultant one at a time although representatives of other groups were free to attend. However, on February 26, 1973, Operation 85, a non-profit St. Paul Civic organization which includes most of the City's Civic leaders, hosted a general meeting at the St. Paul Civic Center at which all invited parties could express their views regarding proposed I-35E. Their statements appear in Appendices 2, 4, and 5. The impact of the public input to the Report reflects itself in the selection of alternates (same as alternatives when used in this Report) for evaluation. For example, RIP 35E was instrumental in the inclusion of 2 of the 7 alternates evaluated and worked with the Consultant in the formulation of a third one. B - 8 divide proposed I-35E would be situated are the relatively affluent professional - managerial "bluff" neighborhood - Summit -Hill district - and the lower -income "flats" area neighborhood. Census data suggest that the neighborhoods have very different charac- teristics and to -date have not had much interaction with one another. d. Probable Effects on the Environment Like any other urban freeway, the probable physical and socio-economic effects are many. The items identified for study are 7 physical and 8 socio- economic environmental factors. The 7 physical environmental factors relate to 1) Noise Pollution, 2) Air Quality, 3) Vibration, 4) Slope Stability on the Bluff Area, 5) Effects on Area Vegetation, 6) Aesthetics and 7) Water Pollution. The 8 socio-economic environmental factors relate to 1) Neighborhood Disruption, 2) Displacement of Families and Businesses, 3) Loss in Property Values (or Gains), 4) Effects on Historic Sites, 5) Effects on Hospitals, 6) Effects on Parks, 7) Effects on Churches and 8) Effects on Schools. Of the categories listed above, it appears that the areas of greatest citizen concern are 1) Noise Pollution, 2) Air Quality, 3) Vibration, 4) Slope Stability on the Bluff Area, 5) Neighborhood Disruption, 6) Loss in Property Values, 7) Effects on Historic Sites, and 8) Effects on Hospitals. In terms of noise, the likelihood is that buildings along about 40% of the 3. 7-mile link will have exposure to 70 decibels (70 dBA) or greater which affects about 188 buildings. In the area of Air Quality, the indications are that traffic on the link will generate Carbon Monoxide (CO) concentrations of about 2 parts per million under worst probable meteorological conditions in 1985. Vibration is of great citizen and hospital concern. It is specially significant to the St. Luke's Division of United Hospitals, Inc. (Proposed I-35E would pass within 150 ft. from parts of the Hospital which house operating rooms.) However, studies conducted subsequent to the submittal of the initial draft of this Report in July, 1973, show that vibration does not represent the threat originally assumed. Please see Section C - Report Update - for details. Slope Stability on the Bluff Area is another area of citizen concern. The Oakland wall, the Children's Hospital area, and the Chancery of the Arch- diocese of St. Paul (see fig. 34) are areas evaluated by the Minnesota Department of Highways and its Consultant. The remedial measures recommended are likely to improve the existing stability of the hillside. Neighborhood disruption is of particular importance to the socio-economic fiber of the City of St. Paul. The primary concern is that the high -income professional -managerial families in the "bluff" area may depart from the City. B - 6 If such an exodus occurs should proposed I-35E be constructed in the Pleasant Ave. corridor, it would represent a general loss. It is impossible to determine whether this would occur. Loss in property values of single-family dwelling units fronting on freeways is an identifiable effect. The relative loss tends to range between about 8% and 15%. A former president of the St. Paul Board of Realtors has indicated that the relative loss in the "bluff" properties may be as high as 40%. (This would apply to the homes at the edge of the bluff. ) The effects of proposed I-35E on the area's historic sites and the Historic Hill District which it passes near are significant because 3 buildings listed in The National Register of Historic Places are in the District. In addition, the Consultant has recommended that a church building designed by the famous Minnesota Architect Cass Gilbert in 1890, and situated adjacent to proposed I-35E right-of-way limits be preserved. (The Church is under private ownership. ) The effects on hospitals necessarily involve the effects of noise, air pollution, and the general condition of the area. It appears that the neighborhood around the hospitals is likely to upgrade rather than deteriorate. On the basis of a segment -by -segment analysis, the data indicate that the areas most severly affected by proposed I-35E in the Pleasant Ave. corridor are the stretches from Grand Ave. -Ramsey St. to Kellogg Boulevard and from B - 7 St. Clair Ave. to Grand Ave. - Ramsey St. in that order. e. Public Input to Report To obtain public input to the Report, the Consultant has attended over 50 meetings with groups interested in the proposed I-35E project. It was the Consultant's opinion that for the study effort to be meaningful, establishing credibility as an impartial third party; acquainting the interested parties with the fundamentals of the transportation planning process, and seeking out as broad a public input base as possible were essential elements. (The premise for this belief was that any traces of distrust on the parts of the parties involved had to be minimized, if not dispelled.) In this connection, the Consultant had over 100 telephone contacts and received over 25 correspondences with interested parties. In general, the interested groups met with the Consultant one at a time although representatives of other groups were free to attend. However, on February 26, 1973, Operation 85, a non-profit St. Paul Civic organization which includes most of the City's Civic leaders, hosted a general meeting at the St. Paul Civic Center at which all invited parties could express their views regarding proposed I-35E. Their statements appear in Appendices 2, 4, and 5. The impact of the public input to the Report reflects itself in the selection of alternates (same as alternatives when used in this Report) for evaluation. For example, RIP 35E was instrumental in the inclusion of 2 of the 7 alternates evaluated and worked with the Consultant in the formulation of a third one. B - 8 f. Alternates and Their Effects Because there were no definitive studies available regarding alternate corridors and plans for proposed I-35E, the Consultant, together with RIP 35E, identified 6 primary alternates on the basis of a cursory map examination. A seventh alternate, mass transit only, also received consideration within the limitations of uncertainty regarding transit planning at the time. Specifically, the seven alternates are as follows: - -ALTERNATE 1: Use existing city streets, sell right-of-way already purchased, remove unnecessary bridges and other construction. This is the do-nothing alternate. - -ALTERNATE 2: Complete proposed I-35E exactly as currently designed in the Pleasant Avenue corridor in St. Paul. - -ALTERNATE 3: Complete I-35E in the Pleasant Ave. corridor but with design modifications to reduce the roadway's adverse environmental effects. - -ALTERNATE 4: Complete I-35E to Shepard Road on the north end of the inplace I-35E bridge across the Mississippi River, then construct an elevated second -tier roadway (viaduct) as I-35E along the approximate alignment of Shepard Road to the Railroad yards east of the City of Saint Paul Central Business District and connect to inplace I-35E north of the C. B. D. - -ALTERNATE 5: Complete I-35E from its junction with I-35 in Dakota County to I-494, have a "Common" Section with proposed I-494 easterly to its junction with north -south T. H. 3, then continue I-35E along T. H. 3, reconstruct the T. H. 3 interchange at the north end of the Lafayette Bridge with East 7th St. , and connect to inplace I-35E north of the C. B. D. Also, in St. Paul, improve Shepard Road and construct parkway -boulevard (Randolph Ave. to Grand Ave. In Dakota Co. , provide link between I-494 and T. H. 110 along currently proposed I-35E corridor. B - 9 --ALTERNATE 6: Complete I-35E from its junction with I-35 in Dakota County to east -west Dakota County Road 30 (about 4 miles south of I-494), construct I-35E along Dakota Co. Rd. 30 alignment to the southerly end of proposed T. H. 3, then continue I-35E along T. H. 3, reconstruct the T. H. 3 interchange at the north end of the Lafayette Bridge with East 7th St. , and connect to inplace I-35E north of the C. B. D. --ALTERNATE 7: Use mass transit to meet travel demands proposed I-35E is designed to satisfy. In effect, the "construct I-35E" alternates involve only 3 corridors. They are the Pleasant Ave. corridor (Alt. 2, 3), the Shepard Road corridor (Alt. 4), and the new T. H. 3 corridor (Alt. 5). The evaluation process applied to the Alternates was a 2-step system. The first step involved determining which Alternates satisfied conceptual criteria. The second step consisted of analyzing the quantifiable costs and benefits of the Alternates which were "promising" from a concept standpoint. The premise here was that analyses that considered both the conceptual and economic standing of the Alternates would provide a sound method for rating them. The conceptual criteria used in the analyses state that: 1. An Alternate shall be able to function as a transportation facility. In other words, this says that each of the Alternate plans should serve travel needs by attracting traffic. The premise for this statement is that it is senseless to construct a transportation facility which will not be used. B - 10 2. An Alternate shall be in "general" conformance with transportation plans developed by responsible Planning Agencies in the St. Paul -Minneapolis Metropolitan Area and be consistent with development objectives. This suggests that each of the Alternate plans should be compatible with the area's trans- portation system and should serve to foster orderly area development. 3. An Alternate shall generate a positive rate of return on public investment. In effect, this says that each alternate should be able to stand on its own financially (to the greatest extent possible). 4. An Alternate shall include a Connection from the junction of proposed I-494 and proposed I-35E in Dakota County to the inplace I-35E - T. H. 110 junction located about 3/4 miles to the north. This requirement recognizes that all of the "construct" I-35E Alternates except one (Alt. 6) feature I-35E construction from I-35 up to its junction with proposed I-494. Hence it follows that a short stretch of roadway between I-494 and T. H. 110 would mean that two high-speed highways to bridges (I-35E bridge and Lafayette Bridge on T. H. 3) across the Mississippi River instead of one would be available. 5. An Alternate shall, to the greatest extent possible, include a connection to the City of Saint Paul's Short Line Road serving the Midway district. This relates to the fact that the purpose of the Short Line Road was to provide access to and from the City's Midway district, which contains industrial, commercial, and trucking concerns. In this connection, proposed I-35E at B - 11 least up to its junction with the Short Line Road near Randolph Ave. was a given. Without an I-35E connection to the Short Line Road, the Short Line is and will remain an ineffective and little -used roadway. 6. An Alternate's effects on the environment shall result in as minimal harm as possible. It is unlikely that any project of the magnitude of proposed I-35E can be constructed without some negative effects on the environment. However, it requires noting that there are environmental requirements which new highways have to satisfy. The conceptual analyses indicated that Alternates 1 and 6 should be eliminated completely from further consideration. In addition, the indications were that Alt. 4 was in the doubtful category. Alt. 7 was also lacking in merit. Subsequently, the economic analyses applied in the form of cost - benefit analyses showed that Alt. 4, with estimated costs and benefits of $135, 000, 000 and $28, 600, 000 respectively, was not a feasible solution. Similar analyses for Alt. 5 resulted in estimated costs of $46, 600, 000 and benefits of $23, 323, 800 in its Ramsey County portion only. Regardless, Alt. 5 does possess the feature of traversing residential lands at a minimal rate in the City of St. Paul. However, it does this at the expense of the dislocation of between 6 and 12 commercial -industrial entities in the vicinity of the Lafayette Bridge - East 7th St. interchange area. B - 12 From a transportation and economic viewpoint, the Pleasant Ave. corridor, with Alt. 3 in particularis the corridor of choice. However, this conclusion would emerge only if the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency grants MHD variances from its noise standards on grounds that the public benefits warrant it. g• Section 4(f) and Section 106 Land Involvement Section 4(f) and Section 106 lands relate respectively to 1) publicly owned parklands, recreation areas, wildlife and waterfowl refuges of National, State or local significance and 2) the preservation of significant historic sites. The Minnesota Department of Highways is currently in the process of preparing statements required for determining involvement in these land categories. B - 13 II. CONCLUSIONS On the basis of the data and analyses, the primary conclusions are that proposed I-35E: 1. Is a transportation facility justified by City of St. Paul needs; by Dakota County needs; and by metropolitan needs. The do-nothing concept is not acceptable. 2. Provides a connection between the City of St. Paul and Interstate Highway 35 that is necessary for the transportation needs and economic vitality of the City just as I-35W does for the City of Minneapolis. (The same type of east and west division of I-35 occurs in the Dallas - Fort Worth area. ) 3. Is vital to the development of Dakota County, which is one of the fastest growing counties in the Twin Cities metropolitan area, because without it, the westerly half of the County would be deprived of a transportation facility its planners have counted on for 20 years. 4. Represents a major north -south transportation thoroughfare that will serve the easterly counties of the St. Paul - Minneapolis metropolitan area. 5. Is a highway for which the data suggest that only 2 corridors, the Pleasant Ave. corridor currently proposed and the new T. H. 3 corridor (Lafayette Freeway), deserve consideration for its routing. 6. Constructed in the Pleasant Ave. corridor would be preferable to its construction in the new T. H. 3 corridor if transportation and economic consid- erations dictate the choice. If the over-riding criterion is to relocate proposed B - 14 I-35E away from the residential parts of the Pleasant Ave. corridor in St. Paul, the new T. H. 3 corridor represents the only other feasible alternate studied. 7. Construction in any corridor is unlikely to meet the noise standards established by the Minnesota Pollution Control. Agency (MPCA) if variances are not issued. 8. Construction in the new T.H. 3 corridor (Lafayette Freeway) is likely to evoke reactions against the facility from South St. Paul and West St. Paul residents similar to those voiced by St. Paulites residing near the Pleasant Ave. corridor. In sum, the conclusion is that the construction of proposed I-35E with design modifications in the Pleasant Ave. corridor rates first. This conclusion applies only if noise pollution, air quality, and the proposed freeway's effects on historic sites in the corridor are considered acceptable by the regulatory bodies involved. B - 15 III. RECOMMENDATIONS The Consultant's recommendation is that Alternate 3 be the first choice for proposed I-35E construction. In this connection, the Consultant lists the same recommendations included in the previous drafts of this Report. Where there are new developments, they are so noted. The recommendations are: 1. Delete 2 ramps at St. Clair Ave. The premise for this is that traffic on St. Clair Ave. between Lexington Parkway and its junction with I-35E exceeds the street's capacity with the ramps in and does not with ramps out. It is desirable to retain the residential and serene character of St. Clair Ave. in this area. The ramp deletions leave only a grade separation at this location. 2. Cover part of the proposed freeway main lanes in the vicinity of the hospitals between Grand Ave. - Ramsey St. and Kellogg Blvd. The premise for this is that this cuts down the noise exposure for St. Luke's Division of United Hospitals, Inc. and Children's Hospital. It also creates a pleasant green space. 3. Carry proposed I-35E under Grand Ave. - Ramsey St. rather than over. The premise for this is that it helps to reduce noise near the hospitals by flattening the main line grades, and provides better acceleration -deceleration characteristics on the ramps in the interchange. In addition, it is the Consultant's opinion that it is more aesthetic. 4. Preserve the German Presbyterian Bethlehem Church at 311 Ramsey St. B - 16 designed by Cass Gilbert in 1890. The premise for this is that the church is an attractive building that should be preserved. (Because the building is under private ownership, there are limitations in what public agencies can do in this respect. ) 5. The Minnesota Department of Highways re-evaluate the slope stability of the Summit hill area near the Chancery of the Archdiocese of Saint Paul. This has been done and the Minnesota Department of Highways and their Consultants will continue to work on this problem. The indications are that the remedial measures recommended improve the general stability of the hillside. 6. The Minnesota Department of Highways communicate with United Hospitals to determine potential solutions to vibration problems in St. Luke's hospital. This has been done and the data indicate that vibration from highway sources will not affect the operations of St. Luke's Division of United Hospitals, Inc. in any noticeable way. B - 17 IV. COMMENTARY The proposed I-35E project pits varying viewpoints against one another. In St. Paul, persons associated with RIP 35E are opposed to I-35E construction in the Pleasant Ave. corridor. Their concern is that the highway will destroy the historic character of the Summit Hill area. Second, a poll taken in March, 1973, indicated that the majority of people in leadership positions with offices in the St. Paul Central Business District favor the construction of I-35E at that location. Similarly, residents in the South Lexington area tend to favor the project. In Dakota County, the municipalities and elected officials favor the completion of I- 35E in its originally proposed corridor (especially in Dakota County). The Consultant agrees that unless there are compelling reasons to relocate the I-35E corridor in the County, it is illogical to do so. Thus far, there are no such reasons. To be sure, opponents of the freeway, in particular, have contended that the currently proposed I-35E design has many shortcomings. Without contending otherwise, it may be useful to place the contentions in perspective. Taken item by item, a selective list of contentions and comments follows. Item: "The proposed interchange between I-35E, I-494, T. H. 55, etc. in Dakota County is too large. " Comment: There will be an EIS for this interchange at which time a more intelligent discussion should be possible. Item: "There is no westward turn towards Minneapolis from I-35E northbound at its junction with I- 94 at the Capitol Approach Complex." B - 18 Comment: True. However, the travel forecasts for 1985 suggest that about 685 out of about 33, 000 vehicles per day traveling north on I-35E, along Pleasant Ave. , or about 2% of the vehicles are affected. Item: "We should not build I-35E just to serve vehicles traveling from Laredo, Texas to Duluth, Minnesota. " Comment: Traffic surveys consistently show that almost all (95%+) of the traffic on proposed I-35E would be generated within the St. Paul - Minneapolis metropolitan area. Less than 5% of travel on the highway would be "true" interstate traffic. Item: "One should evaluate the entire Twin Cities Area Transportation System from top to bottom to evaluate the effects of single link. " Comment: Perhaps partially true. However, limitations exist in any Study. In any event, the construction of proposed I-35E link in the Pleasant Ave. corridor will complete I-35E from the north end of the metropolitan area to its junction with T. H. 110 in Dakota County. With major highway interchanges at both ends of such a link, the entire constructed link is capable of functioning as an independent primary transportation route. The list of contentions can go on and on. The reason for including a few of them here is to highlight that many are not supported by the available data. B - 19 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 C. REPORT UPDATE I, GENERAL In response to local, State, National and International developments, the St. Paul - Minneapolis metropolitan area is a continually changing dynamic entity. Hence, the necessity to update the base data used in this Report as much as possible arises. The conclusions and recommendations the Consultant has derived from the contents of Sections I - IV that follow are premised on 1972-73 data. Accordingly, because changes in 1973-74 have occurred in some areas, this Section provides an update, where applicable, and estimates their effects. II. UPDATE ITEMS For convenience, the update divides into 2 categories. The first category deals with items of State, National and International significance affecting the proposed I-35E project in general. The second relates to items that have a specific bearing on proposed I-35E. a. Items of General Significance At this writing (February, 1975), it appears that three major developments have taken place that bear on proposed I-35E in a general way. They are 1) population projection changes, 2) motor fuel supplies, and 3) inflation. 1. Population Projection Changes In large measure, population, its general characteristics, and its 1 distribution pattern over a metropolitan landscape are the primary parameters affecting an area's transportation needs. Consequently, continued scrutiny and analysis of such projections are justifiably important. Figs. 17 and 18 (see page I-37) give population projections for the 7-county metropolitan area by county and inclusive of the Cities of St. Paul and Minneapolis through the year 2000. The projections represent the figures estimated by the Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities area in 1972. As reference to figs. 17 and 18 indicates, the total population projected for the year 2000 in the Twin Cities metropolitan area was 3, 176, 300 persons. In December of 1974, the Metropolitan Council revised its estimate for the metropolitan area's total population for the year 2000. With a forecast of 2, 888, 000, the new total represents 288, 300 fewer persons, or about 9. 1% less. To determine the impact of such a decline on proposed I-35E, it is necessary to analyze the distribution of the decline. Table C-1 lists the Metropolitan Council's December, 1974,projections for the 7-county area. A comparison between Table C-1 and figs. 17 and 18 reveals that the westerly counties of the metropolitan area are the ones projected for lower growth rates. They are the ones expected to have signifi- cantly lower populations than the Council's 1972 estimates indicated. Notably, the comparison shows that the Council's 1974 projections for Anoka, Carver and Hennepin Counties in sum account for 250, 900 of the total C - 2 288, 300 person decline, or 86. 9%, from its 1972 estimates. In contrast, the population reductions for the easterly counties of Ramsey and Dakota from the 1972 projections for the year 2000 are 3, 950 (626, 500 to 622, 550) and 1, 650 (423, 300 to 421, 650) respectively. (The 1974 estimates are less than the 1972 projections by 0. 63% and 0. 39%, a negligible difference. ) TABLE C - 1 ST. PAUL - MINNEAPOLIS METROPOLITAN AREA POPULATION PROJECTIONS (1980, 1990, 2000) 1980 1990 2000 St. Paul 298, 100 304, 700 312, 700 Minneapolis 421, 000 432, 600 441, 900 St. Paul and Minneapolis 719, 100 737, 300 754, 600 Metropolitan Area 2, 195, 000 2, 560, 000 2, 888, 000 Anoka Co. 209, 550 241, 250 263, 050 Carver Co. 37, 950 56, 950 73, 350 Dakota Co. 226, 900 328, 600 421, 650 Hennepin Co. 1, 033, 750 1, 117, 500 1, 181, 800 Ramsey Co. 515, 850 570, 250 622, 550 Scott Co. 44, 450 60, 400 80, 050 Washington Co. 126, 550 185, 050 245, 550 (Source: Metropolitan Development Guide, December 1974 Revision, prepared by the Twin Cities Area Metropolitan Council. ) The significance of the figures for Ramsey and Dakota Counties is that unless the trip -making function of residents of both counties declines noticeably from projected levels, the current travel projections for proposed I-35E should be reasonable for use in planning. Thus, it appears that the population - related factors given in "Section I - Purpose and Need" remain valid. C - 3 2. Motor Fuel Supply It is reasonable to ask what the long-term effects of price increases (about 70% in 2 years) and of impending shortages in motor fuels will be with respect to projected travel demand on proposed 1-35E. Unfortunately, it is much easier to ask than to provide accurate answers. To assume that the need for travel on proposed I-35E in the Pleasant Ave. corridor or in any other corridor will abate significantly is not reasonable. Rather, it is the Consultant's opinion that travel needs will exist and increase, but the types of vehicles used to meet such needs are likely to be different from those in current use. This is not to say that automobiles are going to disappear from the scene, far from it. However, it is to say that automobile sizes and weights will diminish and the fuel efficiency of the engines used will increase markedly. Automobile sales for the years 1973 to the present already reflect this trend. Regardless of the size, weight, power plant, fuel type, etc. of vehicles in the future, transportation needs in the St. Paul - Minneapolis metropolitan area will increase. The movements of people and goods within the metropolitan community will see to that. Thus, gasoline shortages or no, "public rights - of -way" such as I-35E are essential to the daily functioning of urban communities. C - 4 3. Inflation The cost estimates and benefits provided in Section IV of this Report are based on 1972 dollar values. From that time to the present (February, 1975), inflation has overtaken the State and National scene with unprecedented strength. Two questions arise from this development . The first is the fundamental one of which year's results should prevail if the "economic" conclusions differ for the years involved. The second is the specific one of how inflation has affected the relative costs and benefits of the proposed I-35E Alternates given in this Report. (Applies to Section IV specifically. ) The Consultant has no authority, function, or jurisdiction to enter into the first question regarding which year should serve as the basis for decisions regarding proposed I-35E. (The decision to include I-35E as a part of the National Interstate System of Highways precedes the decade of the 1970's.) Regarding the second question of inflation's effects on costs and benefits, an updated set of figures is in order (where applicable). Reference to Section IV (see IV-92 - IV-100) reveals that the analyses include estimated costs and benefits for the Pleasant Ave. corridor (Alt. 2, 3), the Shepard Road corridor (Alt. 4), and the new T. H. 3 corridor (Alt. 5) alternates. Nationally and in the State of Minnesota, inflation has extracted an C - 5 e extremely heavy toll. The data indicate that, in highway construction, 1975 costs are from 45% to 55% higher than 1972 costs for identical work. Moreover, the major benefit element values (i. e. travel time savings) have not kept pace. Thus, despite increases in savings in motor fuel costs of 60% to 80% over those in 1972, costs have risen faster than benefits in the 1972-75 period. Because of the foregoing, alternates with costs exceeding benefits will become more so. Similarly, alternates with benefits exceeding costs will have their margins of benefits over costs decline. As a result, the Shepard Road Alternate with estimated 1972 costs and benefits of $135, 000, 000 and $28, 600, 000 respectively reflect an even worse relationship in 1975. To update the estimated costs and benefits of the 3 remaining alternates, it appears that increases of 50% for costs and 30% for benefits are reasonable. (The basis for the 30% figure is that it reflects the difference in the minimum Federal wage rates prevalent in 1972 and 1975. ) Applying these increases to the 1972 estimates for Alternates 2, 3 and 5 in Tables IV-5, IV-6 and IV-8 respectively gives the following: Alternate 2 Alternate 3 Alternate 5 Benefits Costs $80, 600, 000 $75, 400, 000 $30, 400, 000 $68, 200, 000 $73, 600, 000 $58, 200, 000 Notes: 1. Increases not applied to $23, 600, 000 already expended. 2. All values are rounded to next $100, 000. 3. Alternate 2 costs exclude items required to minimize environmental harm whereas Alternate 3 includes them. The 1975 estimates above suggest that the Pleasant Ave. corridor C - 6 1 alternates remain at benefit -to -cost ratios of slightly over unity. Also, Alternate 5 retains its unfavorable 1972 cost -to -benefit ratio of about 2 to 1. From an "economics" standpoint, the Pleasant Ave. corridor for proposed I-35E remains superior to I-35E in the new T. H. 3 one. 1 b. Items of Specific Significance The update of specific items presented herein applies only to Sections I, II, and IV of this Report. There are no significant changes that affect material provided in Sections III and V. 1. Section I Update From a concept standpoint, the need for proposed I-35E has not changed. Moreover, the most recent population projections for the Twin Cities area by the Metropolitan Council (December 1974) indicate that the growth patterns for Dakota and Ramsey Counties will be as estimated earlier. In addition, the indications are that there are no marked shifts in parameters that affect transportation planning. For example, vehicle regis- trations and the number of licensed drivers continue to increase; the dispersal of population in the metropolitan community continues; and effective mass transit plans have yet to be adopted. Vehicle registrations in the 7-county metropolitan area have increased from 1,002,600 in 1971 to 1, 108, 300 in 1974, or 10. 54%. Statewide, estimates for the number of licensed drivers have increased from 2,150,000 in 1972 to 2,235,000 in 1974. (Increases in vehicles and drivers usually correlate to increased travel demand. ) Population dispersal continues in the metropolitan area. Both the Cities of St. Paul and Minneapolis have experienced slight losses in population since 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 C - 8 the 1970 census while the metropolitan population has increased as a whole (See Table C-1). There are no indications that dramatic changes in the trends will occur. Mass transit plans for the Twin Cities metropolitan area remain indefinite. The 1973-74 Minnesota State Legislature called for a new mass transit study to determine the feasibility of using PRT (Personal Rapid Transit) vehicles instead of the 40-passenger vehicles on fixed -guideways recommended by the Metropolitan Transit Commission earlier. The preliminary draft of the study presented to the 1975 Legislature tends to rule out PRT vehicles in favor of GRT (Group Rapid Transit) vehicles of about 16-passenger capacity. Interestingly, the 40-passenger vehicle concept seems to remain the most economical one. Any decisions on this subject are not likely to materialize quickly. In any event, the proposed I-35E corridor still remains one of low priority for mass transit purposes. In sum, the items presented in Section I of the Report remain valid. Thus far, it is impossible to identify items that would negate the need for proposed I-35E. C - 9 2. Section II Update To provide an orderly update of specific items, the physical and socio- economic factors considered in Section II of this Report are reviewed here in the same sequence that they appear in the Section. Where the effects have not changed significantly, they are so noted. Reference to Section II indicates that there were 7 physical and 8 socio- economic environmental factors discussed. The physical factors relate to: 1. Noise Pollution 2. Air Quality 3. Vibration 4. Slope Stability on the Bluff Area 5. Effects on Area Vegetation 6. Aesthetics 7. Water Pollution Similarly, the socio-economic factors relate to: 1. Neighborhood Disruption 2. Displacement of Families and Businesses 3. Loss in Property Values (Or Gains) 4. Historic Sites 5. Hospitals 6. Parks and Playgrounds 7. Churches 8. Schools The notable developments that have taken place between August, 1973 and February, 1975 are as follows: --Physical Environmental Factors 1. Noise Pollution: The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has proposed noise limits more stringent than those established by the Federal 1 1 1 1 1 1 C - 10 1 Highway Administration (FHWA) of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) in February, 1973. See Table II-1 on page II-3 for the FHWA design guidelines and sound level definitions. Two of the MPCA documents adopted by the State of Minnesota on November 27, 1974 are: - -NPC-1, Definitions, Severability and Variances for Noise Pollution Control Regulations - -NPC-2, Noise Standards The regulations establish the following noise limits: Land Use Noise Limits - dBA L10 L50 Residential* Daytime (7:00 a. m. -10:00 p. m. ) 65 60 Nighttime (10:00 p. m. -7:00 a. m. ) 55 50 Commercial (24 hr. ) Industrial (24 hr. ) 70 65 80 75 *Residential category includes hotels, motels, hospitals and other facilities with sleeping rooms. Because of the logarithmic character of the noise measurement scale, the difference between the FHWA-accepted 70 dBA limits for L10 and the corresponding MPCA-adopted limits of 65 dBA and 55 dBA for daytime and nighttime levels in residential areas is a major one (see fig. 26a on page II-5). It is uncertain at this point as to how such differences can be resolved without the issuance of variances in accordance with the stipulations of NPC- 1. In addition to the above, the MPCA is currently proposing new regulations C - 11 1 regarding the issuance of permits for activities involving noise and regarding motor vehicle noise limits. The proposed regulations appear in draft form in the following documents: - -NPC-3, Permits for Noise Sources - -NPC-4, Motor Vehicle Noise Limits. March 18, 1975 is the last day on which the MPCA is to receive comments, pro or con, on the proposed drafts. The adoption of any or all parts of NpC-3 and NPC-4 would be unlikely before the latter half of 1975. At this point, it is impossible to estimate the total impact of the more stringent MPCA noise standards on proposed I-35E construction. However, it is possible to state that they would effectively bar such construction in either the Pleasant Ave. or the new T. H. 3 corridor if variances are not allowed. In this connection, it is well to remember that NPC-1 provides a mechanism whereby variances may be issued by the MPCA in cases where highways and other facilities justify them. 2. Air Quality: In the area of air quality, 2 developments are noteworthy. The first is that the St. Paul Central Business District, which in 1973 had not been considered a critical area by the MPCA with respect to satisfying 1975 Federal Carbon Monoxide (CO) limits, is now considered a critical area. The basis for the earlier lower readings appears to be the location of the monitor. Subsequently, a change in the monitor location and additional C - 12 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 readings taken by portable monitoring units have led to the deduction that CO levels in the St. Paul CBD should be a major concern. The second is that there is a possibility that Federal automobile emission rates established as a result of the Clean Air Act of 1970 may be relaxed by Congress. If this occurs, then the requirement that 1977 automobile emission rates achieve a 95% reduction in Carbon Monoxide (CO) and Hydrocarbons (HC) from uncontrolled levels will be delayed. The 1975 model vehicles achieve an 83% reduction in CO and HC. 3. Vibration: The presence of operating rooms in St. Luke's Division of United Hospitals near and facing proposed I-35E in the Pleasant Ave. corridor had prompted the Consultant to recommend in an earlier draft of this Report (July, 1973) that the Minnesota Department of Highways (MHD) and United Hospitals, Inc. jointly attempt to determine the ambient vibration levels at the Hospital. This has been done. With MHD assistance, Paul S. Veneklasen and Associates, Consultants in Acoustics to United Hospitals, Inc. , undertook a vibration study designed to simulate the vibration effects proposed I-35E would generate. The results of the Study appear in a report, "Highway Vibration Study for United Hospitals Medical Complex in Relation to Proposed Extension of Interstate 35E, 22 August, 1974". The conclusions of the study are that vibration from proposed I-35E would be insignificant and no higher than vibration due to other sources; would be less C - 13 than levels measured within the Hospital due to hospital sources and people activities; and would be below the threshold of average human perception and would pose no problems to building structures. 4. Slope Stability on the Bluff Area: Because there was a question regarding factors of safety against earth slides in the area near the Chancery of the Archdiocese of St. Paul (near Kellogg Ave. ), the Consultant had also earlier recommended that MHD re-evaluate the slope stability problem in the Chancery area. The Consultant had noted that in light of indications that the factors of safety after proposed I-35E construction would be near unity (1. 0), it might be prudent to exercise conservatism in this instance. MHD and its Geotechnical Consultant, Shannon and Wilson, Inc. of Seattle, Washington have reviewed the situation as recommended. In a February 5, 1975 report titled, "Supplementary Report No. 1, Study of Slope Stability, T. H. 35E in Vicinity of Archdiocese Chancery, Childrens Hospital and Oakland Wall, St. Paul, Minnesota", S and W, Inc. indicate that their proposed measures would result in an improved overall stability of the hillside in the Chancery area. The weak link in the area would still be the inplace Chancery crib wall. With a factor of safety of about 1. 15(+) before and after proposed I-35E construction, it should exhibit characteristics no worse than those that currently exist and have probably existed since the wall's construction in 1964. The indications are that proposed I-35E will have no detrimental effects on the Chancery crib wall and will actually improve the total stability of the hillside. C - 14 5. Effects on Area Vegetation: No significant changes expected from text of Report. 6. Aesthetics: No significant changes expected from text of Report. 7. Water Pollution: No significant changes expected from text of Report. --Socio-economic Environmental Factors 1. Neighborhood Disruption: No significant changes expected from text of Report. 2. Displacement of Families and Businesses: No significant changes expected from text of Report. 3. Loss in Property Values (Or Gains): The relationships given in the text (see Section I and Tables IV-5, IV-6, and IV-8) still apply. The difference is that property values have risen between 30% and 50% from 1970 levels. These changes reflect in the discussion of Inflation given earlier in this Section. 4. Effects on Historic Sites: Three noteworthy developments regarding historic sites have taken place since the 1972-73 period covered in the text. The first is that The National Register of Historic Places includes 3 more City of St. Paul sites. They are 1) the St. Paul Cathedral situated on the west side of Summit Ave. between Selby and Dayton Avenues; 2) the Pioneer Bldg. ; and 3) the Endicott Bldg. , both of which are at Fourth and Robert Streets in C - 15 the St. Paul C. B. D. Of these 3, the Cathedral falls into the Historic Hill District depicted in fig. 12 (see I-24). The second is that there were citizen activities directed toward the possible inclusion of a modified version of the Historic Hill District in the National Register. In the fall of 1974, the State Committee for National Register Review considered the question of whether to nominate the District for National consideration. After deliberating, the Committee acted to table the nomination possibility indefinitely. The third is that the Minnesota Department of Highways has considered the Consultant's recommendation that the German Presbyterian Church at 311 Ramsey St. , designed by the famous Minnesota architect Cass Gilbert in 1890, be preserved. As noted in the text (Section II - Historic Sites), it is illegal for MHD to pay in excess of the appraised value of the building plus land because the building is under private ownership. Thus, if moving and rebuilding costs were to exceed the appraised value, monies from outside sources would be necessary to save the building. Because of the foregoing, MHD is considering an alternate plan whereby the Cass Gilbert building remains at its current location while incorporating one of the Consultant's other recommendations to revise the I-35E - Grand Ave. -Ramsey St. interchange from I-35E over Grand Ave. -Ramsey St. to under it. Additional studies are currently underway regarding this plan. C - 16 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5. Effects on Hospitals: In accordance with their earlier plans, the St. Paul School Board is disposing of the Lindsay School for the Physically Handicapped site at 310 Pleasant Avenue. The purchaser of the property is United Hospital's, Inc. The St. Luke's Division of United Hospital's, Inc. is situated immediately next to the Lindsay School site. United Hospital's, Inc. and Children's Hospital are currently studying and exploring the possibility of constructing facilities on the Lindsay School site. A possibility is that Children's Hospital would move completely to the Lindsay site from its current location across Pleasant Ave. (i. e. proposed I-35E) from it. This would result in both St. Luke's and Children's Hospitals operating on the same side of proposed I-35E instead of on either side of it. (Note: These developments are in the preliminary planning stages only and there are no guarantees that they would take place. ) 6. Effects on Parks and Playgrounds: No significant changes expected from text of Report. 7. Effects on Churches: No significant changes expected from text of Report. 8. Effects on Schools: As noted in the preceding update on Hospitals, the St. Paul Schools Administration is in the last stages of disposing of the Lindsay School for the Physically Handicapped property. The title transfer to United Hospital's, Inc. will finalize in the summer of 1975. C - 17 Lindsay School is due to cease operations as a school at the end of the 1974-75 academic year. The Administration's plans are to transfer the majority of the children to the Como School now under construction. If the Como School is not ready by the opening date of the 1975-76 academic year, the children will remain at Lindsay School until the first convenient transfer date. C - 18 3. Section IV Update Reference to Section IV of this Report reveals that the Consultant has considered 7 alternates in connection with proposed I-35E. Moreover, Section IV reveals that the selection of the alternates was on the basis of a cursory map examination and the result of a combined effort between RIP 35E and the Consultant. The analyses in Section IV led to the conclusion that the Pleasant Ave. corridor (Alt. 2, 3) and the new T. H. 3 corridor (Alt. 5) alternates were the only ones deserving of consideration. The data also showed that the Pleasant Ave. corridor was a superior transportation corridor and represented a more economically sound choice with respect to public investment. (An update on the effects of inflation on these alternates appears earlier in this Section. ) As of January 2, 1975, by the Mayor's approval of a Council Resolution (C. F. 264817) of December 31, 1974, the City of St. Paul is requesting that the Minnesota Department of Highways include 2 new proposed plans in their "formal consideration" for proposed I-35E. The first proposal requested for study as an Alternate is one presented by RIP 35E to the City Council on December 31, 1974. The second proposal is the request to have the Short Line Road in St. Paul considered for proposed I-35E routing. (The RIP 35E proposal appears to be a combination of Alternate 5 and some aspects of Alternate 4 studied in this Report. ) In this regard, the Consultant's role is limited to noting that these C - 19 proposals have been presented to the Minnesota Department of Highways. A copy of the Council Resolution and of material passed out by RIP 35E at the City Council meeting of December 31, 1974 appear in Plates C and D respectively for informational purposes only. C-20 i WHITE - CITY CLERK PINK - FINANCE CANARY EPARTMENT BLU /- MAYOR Presented By Referred To CITY OF SAINT PAUL it Resolution Council 264817File N 0. Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date Yeas WHEREAS, the CityyRIP 35-E and other plaintiffs in May 1972 did request that the Minnesota State Highway Department prepare an environmental impact statement on the portion of 35-E between the Lexington Avenue Bridge and the State Capitol Approach; and WHEREAS, at this time that environmental impact state- ment has not been finished; and WHEREAS, by anybody's estimate it still may be a substan- tial period of time before that environmental impact statement is finished. and the hearings held and completed on it, now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the Saint Paul City Council urges the Minnesota State Highway Department to accelerate the environ- mental impact statement process; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Saint Paul City Council goes on record as supporting the request of the South Lexington Avenue residents that some relief be granted to the traffic congestion on South Lexington; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Saint Paul City Council requests the Minnesota State Highway Department to formally consider the RIP 35-E Parkway proposal as one of its alterna- tives; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Saint Paul City Council also requests the Minnesota State Highway Department to formally consider the Short Line corridor as a further alternative for the routing of 35E; and be -it FINALLY RESOLVED, that the Saint Paul City Council will cooperate to the fullest extent possible in seeing that the 35—E question is satisfactorily resolved. COUNCILMEN N ays Christensen Hozza Levine Roedler Sylvester Tedesco President Hunt Adopted by Council: Date Certified By Appro By d b Mayor: Date In Favor 0 Against Council,8ecretary cc�_ /`` e ta.m.4, DEC 31 1974 PUBLISHED JAN 1 1 1975 1975 Requested by Department of: By Form Approved by C'ty Attorpeyi\ for By Approved by Mayoru mission to Council Plate C. Copy of City Council of St. Paul Resolution No. 264817 Approved Jan. 2,1975, Regarding Proposed 1-35E. C-2I 3 CD n 0 7" CD c) 0 -n CO • 10 0 7 CD (J o PARKWAY NOW C c 0 0 73 10 w cn rn N (D 0 c v_ 0 0 0 (A 0 At the present time, all construction on 35-E has been delayed by legal agreement between RIP 35-E, the City and the Highway Department to prepare an environmental Impact statement and to consider alternatives before further construction. Such an environmental impact statement is required by the National Environmental policy Act (NEPA) as well as State law. NEPA litigation is also possible over the adequacy of the impact state- ment after it is completed, that is, whether it fully explains the environmental harm that can occur and whether it fully considers alter- native locations and designs for the highway. Such NEPA litigation on other highways in other parts of the country has delayed construction for periods up to 5 years. In several cases around the country, different highway problems involving unique sections of cities or parkland have been resolved by special congressional legislation to authorize 90-10% funding of parkway alterna- tives. An example is Franconia Notch in New Hampshire. At the present time, the Federal Highway Trust Fund contains over $5 billion of unallocated funds and thus possible Increase of costs due to an alternative which involves a parkway and additional freeway construction for a connecting IInk is not a bar at the federal level. Federal Highway Administration D has been favorable to such special legislation when it will solve a problem .< of completing highway construction in a particular area that has general community support. Z Q What RIP 35-E is proposing is that groups in St. Paul consider forming a lE coalition to support such a proposal. Highway Department plan for 35-E threatens, preservation of St. Paul's historical residential area through which it runs. A better and more direct access for industrial traffic that avoids these difficulties by utilizing the Lafayette route can be seen in Figure 4, Highway Department plan does not offer access to Minneapolis from 35-E as no provision is made to go west on 1-94. Despite the size and complexity of the interchange between 35-E and 1-94, only north and east connections are present. Thus access to downtown St. Paul is confused rather than improved. In addition, the presence of a major freeway will cause deterio- ration of the wild quality of the heavily wooded river bluff under which it passes. Another point to consider is that this route passes four major hospitals within 300 feet. It is doubtful that even expensive extra construction for noise abatement could bring the noise level within the stand- ards set by newly adopted State standards. This route also passes within 1000 feet of 80 sites in the State and National Historic Register. r r Ell War 1 M M r S M N I M r MI— N M IIIIII (4 uo3) Q elold The Parkway plan uses all existing con- struction on proposed 35-E corridor but Instead of freeway with its attendant environmental hazards substitutes instead a landscaped road that enhances the area through which it passes by adding a bike pathway and pedestrian trail to the already planned automobile transit route. It creates a better traffic flow through and around the downtown by creating more commuter lanes in the Southwest corridor. It does not infringe upon the hospital campuses and it preserves the parklike ambience of Ramsey Hills wooded bluff The Parkway plan creates superb North and East access to the Civic Center that doesn't exist in the Highway Department plan. Access is also provided to the Crosby Lake area. In the downtown area, the traffic utilizing Lafayette Bridge is connected to the existing freeway system. This plan also opens North access into Riverside -Industrial Park. Industrial traffic is routed through industrial areas. A better interchange Is provided with 1-94 that avoids the disruption required by demolition and reconstruction of the Capitol area interchange necessary in the Highway Department plan. Reduction of traffic on downtown East-West streets will also result. A proposal brought forward by St. Paul citizens to improve the competitive commercial position of downtown St. Paul, by providing a massive Increase in commuter and industrial access while actually raising the quality of life in the core city. The plan utilizes all construction presently in place in the 35-E corridor from the Lexington bridge to downtown St. Paul and recommends extensive new highway construction to the west and south of the downtown area where needed routes presently do not exist. This plan will also take pressure off the weave Interchange in the already crowded Capitol Approach area. PART 1. Bring a landscaped 4 lane divided limited access parkway up from the Lexington bridge onto the shortline road. This will have the effect to removing all but local traffic from south Lexington. PART 2. Bring a commuter access boulevard flanked by a linear park system along the forrested bluff corridor from the shortline into the West side of the Central Business district. PART 3. Proceed with planned upgrading of parts of Shepard Road and create a connection between Shepard Road 1-94 and the Lafayette bridge corridor. PART 4. Establish the proposed connection between the Lafayette bridge and 35-E to the North of downtown. PART 5. Utilize the present terminus of 35-E between Miller and St. Joseph's Hospitals as a superb access to the Civic Center area. PART 6. Allow the St. Lukes-Chlldren's Hospital area to develop into a comprehensive and health care delivery campus easily accessable by public transportation. EFFECT: 1) Industrial traffic routed out of C.B.O. and directly to industrial sites. 2) Three major commuter roads in the southwest part of St. Paul. 3) Preservation of the Clty's best feature, the historic Summit Avenue and river bluff area. 4) Elimination of environmental damage to large residential areas. 5) Increased access to the Civic Center otherwise eliminated by the present plan. 6) A climate and quality in the core of the City which will attract rather than discourage. 7) A park link to Crosby lake area. III. COMMENTARY The update data do not suggest that transportation parameters used in the planning process have changed significantly over the last 2-year period except in 2 cases. The first case is in the area of motor fuel availability. There is no way of escaping the fact that the year 1975 will include Federal action designed to reduce fuel consumption. In the short term, this is likely to result in the reduction of non -essential person -trips in passenger cars. In the long term, the probability is that the desire for mobility of an affluent society will continue to increase. Increases in travel demand and lack of motor fuel supplies and/or high fuel costs is likely to lead to a combination of developments such as: - -smaller and more fuel -efficient vehicles. - -more judicious use of vehicles (i. e. car pooling, increases in vehicle occupancy rates, etc. ). --improvement in mass transit usage. It is not prudent to assume that the automobile, or some facsimile, will disappear from the transportation scene in the foreseeable future. It is even less prudent to suggest that mass transit alone will be a panacea for transpor- tation needs in the Twin Cities metropolitan area up to the year 2000. Thus, the probability is very low that travel demand in the proposed I-35E corridors will change to the extent that the facility would not be necessary. C - 24 The second case is in the area of noise pollution where the differences in noise standards between those of the Federal Highway Administration and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (more stringent) are large. The assumption here is that MPCA will evaluate each highway case individually and will grant variances if the project warrants it. There are also other factors in which changes have taken place. However, it appears that those changes have not been of sufficient magnitude to alter the conclusions and recommendations derived from the data in the Report. C - 25 SECTION I THE PROPOSED PROJECT SECTION I - THE PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES SECTION SUMMARY AND COMMENTS A. SUMMARY B. COMMENTS I-f I-i I. THE PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT I-1 - I-86 A. GENERAL I-1 B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1-5 1. The Proposed Highway and Its Elements 1-5 2. Topography, Geology and Land Use I-17 a. Topography and Geology I-17 b. Land Use I-20 3. Purpose and Need 1-30 a. Metropolitan Considerations 1-32 1. Area Notes I-32 2. Metropolitan Travel Demand I-41 b. City of Saint Paul Considerations 1-55 1. Neighborhoods Served I-55 2. The Central Business District I-57 3. Transportation I- 61 4. Regional and Community Benefits I-69 a. Economic Impact 1-69 b. Traffic Safety and Congestion Relief 1-77 c. Investments I-79 d. Mobility 1- 79 5. History of Project 1-81 6. Current Status of Project I-85 I - a TABLE I - 1 I - 2 I - 3a I - 3b I - 4 I - 5 I- 6 SECTION I - THE PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT LIST OF TABLES PAGE SUMMARY OF PROPOSED MAINLINE I - 10 ROADWAY ELEMENTS ST. PAUL RESIDENTIAL ZONING I - 20 CLASSIFICATIONS PARKS IN I-35E LINK AREA I - 27 PLAYGROUNDS IN I-35E LINK AREA I - 28 AVERAGE DAILY TRAVEL FORECASTS i - 31 ON I-35E LINK FORECASTS OF METROPOLITAN AREA I - 44 TRAVEL CHARACTERISTICS STANDARD METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL I - 46 AREA (SMSA) TRAVEL CHARACTERISTICS I - 7 STATE OF MINNESOTA POPULATION, OPERATOR'S LICENSES AND VEHICLES REGISTRATION I - 8 SEVEN -COUNTY METROPOLITAN AREA POPULATION AND VEHICLE REGISTRATION I - 9 OFFICE SPACE AND EMPLOYMENT FORECAST FOR THE SAINT PAUL CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT 1970, 1980, 1990 I - 49 i - 50 I - 58 ST. PAUL ARTERIAL STREET TRAFFIC I - 62 VOLUMES RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUIRED FOR I-35E I - 72 IN SAINT PAUL TAX DATA ON RESIDENTIAL REAL ESTATE FOR PROPERTIES IN WARD 5, CITY OF SAINT PAUL I - 13 RIGHT-OF-WAY PURCHASES AND REAL ESTATE TAXES I - b I - 73 I - 74 I - 14 CITY OF SAINT PAUL VALUATIONS I - 15 CITY OF SAINT PAUL COUNCIL ACTIONS I - c I - 76 I - 84 SECTION I - THE PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 National System of Interstate and Defense I - 2 Highways Figure 2 State of Minnesota Freeway System I - 3 Figure 3 Proposed Twin Cities Freeway Network I - 4 and Project Area Figure 4 General Plan of Proposed I-35E from West I - 7 7th St. to the I-94 Junction in the Capitol Approach Complex, St. Paul, Minnesota Figure 5 Proposed I-35E Link Superimposed on Aerial Photographs Figure 6 Plan View of Proposed I-35E from West 7th Street to Jefferson Avenue Figure 7 Plan View of Proposed I-35E from Jefferson Avenue to St. Clair Avenue Figure 8 Plan View of Proposed I-35E from St. Clair Avenue to Kellogg Boulevard Figure 9 Plan View of I-35E and 1-94 Junction at Capitol Approach Complex Figure 10 U.S. Geological Survey Map of Project Area Figure 11 Zoning Map for Project Area Figure 12 Figure 13 Figure 14 Historical Hill District Limits Designated By 1973 Minnesota State Legislature City of Saint Paul Median Income Profile I - 25 Housing Values By Block In Selected Parts I - 26 of Census Tracts 357 and 358 I - d Figure 15 Saint Paul Public School Attendance Boundaries, 1972 Figure 16 The Twin Cities 7-County Metropolitan Area of the Twin Cities Figure 17 Population Forecasts for the Total Metropolitan Area, and the Cities of Saint Paul and Minneapolis Figure 18 Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Population Forecasts By County Figure 19 Employment Distribution in Selected Parts of the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area (Source: Metropolitan Council and U.S. Census (1970) ) Figure 20 Person Trips By Mode and Time of Day (Source: Metropolitan Council) Figure 21 Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Person -Trip Distribution (Source: Metropolitan Council) Figure 22 Figure 23 Stratification of Person Trips Per Day As A Function of Population and Automobile Ownership in Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas (SMSA) (Source: Peat, Marwick, Livingston and Co. ) Travel in Project Area and Saint Paul Central Business District, 1972 (Source: City of Saint Paul Traffic Map) I - 29 I - 34 I - 37 I - 37 I - 38 I - 43 I - 43 I - 46 I - 64 Figure 24 Travel Forecasts for 1985 with Do -Nothing I - 65 Alternatives Figure 25 Travel Forecasts for 1985 - Alternative 2 I - 66 I - e SECTION I - THE PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT SECTION SUMMARY AND COMMENTS A. S UMMAR Y The proposed highway project is a 3. 7-mile long link of Interstate Highway 35E in the City of Saint Paul, Minnesota. Situated southwesterly of the City's Central Business District (C. B. D. ), the link represents a $52-million project, inclusive of monies expended to date and of the cost of required modifications in the Capitol Approach area. The proposed I-35E link is a 6-lane facility which is a primary part of the basic network of freeways proposed for the Saint Paul - Minneapolis metropolitan area. The link includes 5 interchanges, 15 ramps, 15 highway bridges, 1 rail- road bridge and 3 pedestrian bridges. The proposed I-35E alignment satisfies design speed requirements of 50 miles per hour and basically follows the toe of a hill, which represents a natural divide between neighborhoods commonly referred to as "bluff" and "flats" neighborhoods. The topography in the link area and the constraints it presents dominate design considerations for the proposed freeway significantly. Proposed I-35E is an example of a project on which work had already commenced and was ongoing prior to the requirement for an Environmental Impact Statement. In this connection, expenditures on the project to date total $23. 6 million, or 45. 4% of the estimated total cost. The work already completed through 1973 includes about 75% of the grading; 10 of the total of 19 bridges proposed; 2 primary sewer tunnels for drainage; slope stability I -f structures; and nearly 100% of the right-of-way acquisitions. In large measure, the area to be traversed by proposed I-35E is of residential character. There do not appear to be any Section 4(f) lands in- volved in the proposed corridor as park lands acquired for I-35E construction are very minimal (0. 005 acres out of about 12. 8 acres). Moreover, the land acquired is such that it does not seem to have national, state, or local signifi- cance as a public park, recreation area, wildlife and waterfowl refuge, or historic site. Specific factors in the proposed I-35E corridor deserving of special mention include (but are not limited to) items such as 1) I-35E is set to pass between 2 hospitals; 2) I-35E is near a State of Minnesota -designated historic hill district, which includes 2 buildings listed in the National Register of Historic Places; and 3) I-35E runs immediately below high -value bluff resi- dences owned by high -income families. (Note: A joint study by the Minnesota Historical Society and the Minnesota Department of Highways is currently in process to determine the probable effects proposed I-35E may have on historic sites near it. ) The factors resulting in a need for proposed I-35E, whether it be in this corridor or in another one, relate to both metropolitan and City of Saint Paul considerations. From a metropolitan standpoint, the considerations are: --To provide a connection to and from I-35 through the City of Saint Paul in a manner similar to the service provided by I-35W to the City of Minneapolis. I - g The purpose of this is to provide that the present "balance" that prevails in the Twin Cities metro area is not deliberately destroyed. - -To provide the easterly counties of the 7-County metropolitan Twin Cities area with a direct high-speed connection to and from I-35. - -To provide for the forecast increases in travel demands within the City of Saint Paul and in Dakota, Ramsey and Washington Counties. (Without an I-35E link to complete the network, these counties do not have a through high-speed, north -south transportation facility programmed for them. ) - -To accommodate the planned development in the easterly counties of the Metropolitan area. (This is particularly true in the case of Dakota County where I-35E has been a "given" for at least 20 years and where planning has been based on that assumption. ) The City of Saint Paul Considerations regarding I-35E include the following: - -To provide transportation services for about 50, 000-plus residents situated to the southwest of the City's Central Business District (C. B. D. ). - -To permit the City's primary activity centers, including the C. B. D. , to compete with others in the metropolitan area so that the econom is activity in the community remains vital or improves. - -To provide the City's residents with reasonable ease of access so that they may avail themselves of metropolitan opportunities which they otherwise may not be able to do. On a general basis, I-35E should relieve the expected levels of congestion I - h and result in safer travel. For example, in 1985, the projections are that over 80, 000, 000 vehicle miles of travel and corresponding total savings in travel times and in improved safety valued at about $2, 800, 000 in 1972 dollars can be expected on the link. B. COMMENTS Planning for the future transportation needs of a metropolitan area such as that of the Twin Cities involves the evaluation of a wide array of inter- related factors. Some of the factors are difficult to quantify or to forecast with great accuracy. Therefore, it shares the same weaknesses as other planning functions which have to rely on the best estimates available of what conditions will be like 20 - 30 years into the future. The data presented hereafter in Section I identify some of the major factors considered in the case of the proposed I-35E project. I -i SECTION I - THE PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT A. GENERAL The proposed highway project is an approximately 3. 7-mile long link of Interstate Highway 35E located in the City of Saint Paul, Minnesota. In turn, I-35E is a part of Interstate Highway I-35 which extends from Laredo, Texas to Duluth, Minnesota, a distance of approximately 1430 miles. The Saint Paul -Minneapolis (Twin Cities) metropolitan area is one of the largest urban centers situated along the I-35 route. (Figs. 1, 2 and 3 show the alignment of I-35 nationally and in the State of Minnesota, as well as its configuration in the Twin Cities area. ) Because of the existence of two major cities in the Saint Paul -Minneapolis metropolitan area, I-35 divides into 2 segments (I-35E and I-35W) prior to entering the Cities from the south and from the north. Service to Saint Paul is via I-35E while I-35W provides access to Minneapolis. Together, the two segments of freeway constitute parts of the 127. 8-mile urban freeway network proposed for the Twin Cities. About 102. 0 miles, or 80% of the freeway network were open to traffic as of May, 1973. Fig. 3 depicts the proposed Twin Cities freeway network and identifies the specific project area. As fig. 3 indicates, the segment of I-35E studied in this work traverses an area of the City of Saint Paul situated southwesterly of the City's central business district (C. B.D. ). The directional orientation of the link is nearly north -south at its southerly end and northeast -southwest (for the most part) I - 1 MIN MEI N =I NMI IIIIII Mil Mil II= I♦ 11= NMI I= M IMIE IIIIMI MIN E I= H I N Figure I. National System of Interstate and Defense Highways (Source: Rand -McNally Road Atlas and Travel Guide) Figure 2. State of Minnesota Freeway System (Source: Minnesota Highway Department) I-3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Medi Lake .n Prairie Prior Lake Osseo CRYST R-p oon Rapids Brooklyn Park en Valle 4 Sp .ing L Park ST. PAUL RIl1A1&ONA AIRPORT Blaine ANOKA CO. L. PORT L ounds Ant hon Ard n Apple Valley review Lino Lake ad na is e ghts aplewoo South St. Pau Inver Grove Heights R` caieuiWMiles 9 2 M cn- _� w..d a kr � iVyill North j St. Paul Figure 3. Proposed Twin Cities Interstate Network and Project Area. I— 4 along its remaining length. Also, while the link is indeed not the only segment of I-35E proposed but yet to be constructed in the metropolitan area, it does happen to be the only non -completed portion within City of Saint Paul limits. The proposed highway project represents an approximately $52-million undertaking. Of this amount, $23. 6 million has already been expended, with initial expenditures dating back to 1958. (Note: The $52-million estimate includes the cost of modification in the already constructed Capitol Approach area where proposed I-35E and inplace I-94 come together. ) B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The description of a proposed highway properly entails not only- itemizing its physical characteristics, but examining its relationships with the social and economic fiber of the areas affected by it as well. Accordingly, the description presented includes the following specific areas: 1. The physical elements of the proposed I-35E roadway link. 2. Land use characteristics (physical and socio-economic) of lands traversed by and abutting the proposed highway alignment. 3. The need and purpose factors for the proposed project. 4. Regional and community benefits to be derived from I-35E. 5. Current Status of the project. 1. The Proposed Highway And Its Elements The proposed I-35E link in question is a 3. 7-mile long freeway segment in Saint Paul extending from West 7th St. at its southerly end to its junction I - 5 with east -west I- 94 in the vicinity of the Minnesota State Capitol area at its northerly end. The link is primarily (over 85%) a 6-lane facility, which includes 5 interchange areas, 15 ramps, 15 highway bridges, 1 railroad bridge, and 3 pedestrian overpasses. (Where I-35E goes over a cross street, it has been counted as 2 bridges even though the structure may be a single wide one. ) Specifically, the 5 interchanges are at 1) Randolph Ave., 2) Victoria St. , 3) St. Clair Ave., 4) Grand Ave. -Ramsey St., and 5) Kellogg Boulevard. (A major connection involving a link to the City of St. Paul's Short Line Road is part of the Randolph Ave. interchange. ) As reference to fig. 4 indicates, with the exception of Victoria St., the aforementioned streets are east -west service roadways. They, along with Jefferson Ave. and the Chicago -Milwaukee -St. Paul and Pacific Ry., and the terrain of the area represent the primary design control elements on the I-35E route. With reference to the physical setting of the land, the terrain slopes downward toward the Mississippi River located to the east and southeast of the proposed I-35E alignment. As one progresses northerly from West 7th St., the slope becomes more pronounced in the proposed highway vicinity. In this con- nection, one needs to note that the C-M-St. P. & P-R. R. mainline tracks follow the toe of the slope of the Linwood Park bluff area. The physical relief at this location is generally about 80 ft. Table I-1 itemizes the pertinent features of the 5 interchanges and the links between them. As the table indicates, interchanges occur at a spacing of about 2 per mile and the right -of -way width varies from 150 ft. to about 720 ft. I- 6 11111 NMI — INN NM NM NOR SIN IN M MN INN INN MI INN 11111 NM INII INN H COMCVMOIA INiE I= li 1L 1 'I it 1111 Jr _1 -1 act ] f 1 lsJLif `alb - E JC uer_�� �1�:�r ►C- ��o`� $ f L_ Jr J, ~ �JLf• I uera_1 l— J ..11 A J• 1L_� i1 zi�fi ]!-1 rya L 1L�aL 7� r%C CIthilligI®©ItI AOfL14+.hjc'9 400.7 0 1/2 1 Statute Miles Figure 4. General Plan of Proposed I-35E from West 7th St. to the 1-94 Junction in the Capitol Approach Complex, St. Paul, Minnesota I - 8 The 720 ft. width occurs mainly in the Randolph Ave. interchange area. Con- struction on a steep sidehill and the presence of connections from proposed I-35E to the City's Short Line Road at this location necessitates the 720 ft. width. Otherwise, the average right-of-way width is between 250 ft. and 300 ft. The horizontal and vertical geometrics of the 6-lane roadway satisfy design speeds of a minimum of 50 miles per hour except in the vicinity of the I-94 junction where 10°00' horizontal curvatures correlate to design speeds in the 35 mph to 40 mph range. In this connection, fig. 5 shows proposed I-35E superimposed on aerial photographs taken of the area in April and May of 1958. At this point, it is necessary to note that Table I - 1 excludes design modifications in the I-94 and I-35E "Common Section" in the Saint Paul capitol approach area. The purposes of the design changes were 1) to accommodate traffic volumes in excess of the 1975 travel projections on which the original design was based and 2) to improve weaving movements within about a 1700-ft. common section. The modifications in question involve the addition of 2 ramps (1 each way) in the section and reconstructing the Wabasha St. bridge, and lengthening the bridges at Tenth St. and at St. Peter St. Proceeding from south to north, the proposed I-35E link starts with a 0. 77-mile segment at West 7th St. and continues along a north -south axis to Randolph Avenue. In this segment, I-35E runs alongside and east of Lexington Parkway at a distance of 400 ft. to 500 ft. from it (distance to I-35E centerline). An elevation difference of 20 ft. to 45 ft. exists between the Parkway and I-35E I - 9 Location TABLE I- 1 SUMMARY OF PROPOSED I-35E MAINLINE ROADWAY ELEMENTS WEST 7th ST. TO I-94 JUNCTION ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA Number Roadway Right -of -Way Length of Interchange Elevation Hor. Curve Vert. Grade Width Miles Lanes Type Ft. Max. Degree Max. % Ft. West 7th St. Segment Cumulative Randolph Ave. Jeffer son Ave. Victoria St. St. Clair '-' Ave. Grand Ave. - Ramsey St. Kellogg Blvd. I-94 Junction 0. 77 0. 77 6 0. 32 1.09 4 0. 26 1.35 6 0. 54 1.89 6 0.89 2.78 6 0.46 3.24 6 0.42* 3.66* 6 4+4 778. 0 819.2 858. 0 827.6 786. 0 810.0 792. 5 783. 0 No Curve 1.70 150-500 3°00' 3.35 500-720 3°00' 2.35 300-340 4°07' 2.20 280-450 1°30' 3.00 220-400 2°00' 3. 10 260-500 10°00' 3. 10 350' .4- Notes: Total length does not include modifications in I-94 Junction area. JEFFERSON Figure 6. Plan View of Proposed I-35E from West 7th Street to Jefferson Ave. below. In relationship to the immediately adjacent existing ground, proposed I-35E is depressed about 5 - 6 ft. except within the interchange areas. The bridges in this segment are the Randolph Ave. bridge over proposed I-35E and a pedestrian overpass near Scheffer Avenue. The plan view of this segment, Segment 1, appears in fig. 6. At Randolph Ave. , the proposed I-35E plan includes a full diamond interchange as well as connections to the "Short Line" road to the northwest. The alignment at this point starts curving to the east and the I-35E mainline changes from a depressed section to an elevated one. Lexington Parkway to the west continues 45-50 ft. above I-35E mainline grades. In this segment, the proposed roadway construction occurs on portions of a steep hillside. The area between Randolph Ave. and Jefferson Ave. , Segment 2, contains the connecting roadways to the "Short Line" roadway. In the planning of the trans- portation network for the area, the Short Line is an integral member of the I-35E proposal which takes on the function of providing service to commercial, truck- ing and residential interests in the Midway area of the Twin Cities (see figs. 4 and 5). Proposed I-35E in this 0. 32-mile segment is a 4-lane roadway that continues from under Randolph Ave. and climbs to pass over Jefferson Ave. The proposed roadway occupies space on a hereto- fore unused hillside. As a result, the roadway section is one where the existing ground rises upward from it on one side and drops away from it on the other. The segment includes 5 bridges - two each for I-35E over the Short Line Road and Jefferson Ave. respectively, and one for a ramp from southbound I-35E to Randolph Ave. over the Short Line Road. Because of the closeness of the full -access Randolph Ave. interchange, direct access from Jefferson Ave. to and from I-35E at this location is not warranted. See fig. 6 for a plan view of Segment 2. The next segment, Segment 3 - Jefferson Ave. to Victoria St. , is on an almost east -west axis and is 0. 26 miles long. The shift from the previous north -south orientation of I-35E reflects the topographic constraints prevalent in the area. The C. M. St. P & P-R. R. and more importantly the imposing bluff confronting a north -south continuation are the factors resulting in the change in direction. The roadway returns to a 6-lane section and continues elevated. Existing ground remains at 15-25 ft. lower than proposed I-35E elevations. Access to and from I-35E is available via a half -diamond inter- change at Victoria St. The only bridges in this segment are the two carrying I-35E over Victoria St. Fig. 7 presents a plan view of this segment. Victoria St. to St. Clair Ave. , Segment 4, a stretch of 0. 54 miles, involves another directional change. Again, it reflects the topographic con- straints of the area. The proposed highway follows the toe of the bluff. In this I - 12 [. INWOOD PARA PLAYGROUND sr ccA/R PLAYGROUNDS P • 123 Figure 7 Plan View of Proposed I-35E from Jefferson Ave. to St. Clair Ave. connection, I-35E turns northeasterly and continues in that direction to the I-94 junction. Near St. Clair Ave. , I-35E roadway elevations are about 100 ft. lower than the existing ground at the top of the bluff on the left while fill and cut sections are evident to the right. The proposal includes a half -diamond interchange on the northerly side of St. Clair Ave. The 2 bridges in Segment 4 are at the C. M. St. Paul & Pacific R. R. crossing and at St. Clair Ave. See fig. 7 for details. In its segment from St. Clair Ave. to Grand Ave. - Ramsey St. , proposed I-35E is a 6-lane facility which extends 0. 89 miles and continues in a northeasterly direction. This segment, Segment 5, basically follows the corridor of existing Pleasant Ave. , a 4-lane Saint Paul arterial street which carried 13, 700 vehicles per day in 1960. (Pleasant Ave. has since been severed between St. Clair Ave. and Grand Ave. - Ramsey St. as a result of clearing and construction work already completed for I-35E. ) Looking northeasterly, the bluff rising about 80-110 ft. above proposed I-35E to the left and the ground falling away about 5-20 ft. to the right (for the most part) typifies the main form of the road- way. A full -diamond interchange proposed at Grand Ave. - Ramsey St. features proposed I-35E elevating over inplace Grand Ave. - Ramsey St. The segment includes 4 bridges. Two bridges are at the Grand Ave. - Ramsey St. I - 13 Figure 8. Plan View of Proposed I-35E from St. Clair Ave. to Kellogg Blvd overpass, one carries Relocated Grand Ave. over I-35E, and a fourth one is a pedestrian overpass in the vicinity of Goodrich Ave. The plan view of Segment 5 appears in fig. 8. The next primary segment, Segment 6, in the West Seventh St. - I-94 Junction link of proposed I-35E is the 0. 46-mile long stretch between Grand Ave. - Ramsey St. and Kellogg Boulevard. The proposed alignment, which appears in fig. 8, is nearly identical to that of inplace Pleasant Ave. although the wider right-of-way requirements of I-35E necessitate roadway construction closer to the bluff than is currently the case. At present, the bluff stands about 100-140 ft. above Pleasant Ave. According to the proposed grades on I-35E, elevation differences between the main lanes and the top of the bluff about 80-110 ft. would still prevail. The area traversed in this segment is a sensitive one. On the one hand is the presence of major facilities such as 2 hospitals (Children's Hos- pital with 107 beds, and the St. Luke's Division of United Hospitals, Inc. with 360 beds); the Pleasant Hill Nursing Home (90 beds); the Hoikka House for Adult Ambulatory Care (117 beds); the Lindsay Public School I - 14 for the Physically Handicapped (about 80 students); and the Chancery of the Archdiocese of St. Paul - Minneapolis within about 400 ft. from the main lanes. On the other hand is the existence of a large State -designated (1973) historic hill district near the bluff -side right-of-way of proposed I-35E. The historic hill district includes the James J. Hill house and the Burbank - Livingston -Griggs house, both of which are listed in The National Register of Historic Places and both of which are situated on the bluff -side of Summit Ave. overlooking the location of proposed I-35E below. (See fig. 12 for the bound- aries of the historic hill district. ) The proposed design for this segment includes 4 bridges. They are a pedestrian overpass linking Children's Hospital and St. Luke's Hospital, the Kellogg Blvd. bridge over proposed I-35E, Ramp from northbound I-35E to Kellogg Blvd. over Frontage Road bridge, and the bridge carrying a Ramp from Kellogg Blvd. to southbound I-35E over the main lanes. The final segment, Segment 7, of proposed I-35E is from Kellogg Blvd. to the I-94 Junction at the "Capitol Approach" Complex, an interchange area already in use. The Complex involves connections between I-35E, I-94, and City streets. As reference to Table I- 1 indicates, Segment 7 is 0. 42 miles long. However, an additional 1700 ft. , or 0. 32 miles of miscellaneous lane construction are necessary. The proposed form of the roadway in this segment is a depressed one over its entire length. Bridge construction in Segment 7 consists of rebuilding one bridge and extending the end spans of 2 others for the purpose of improving weaving requirements. (The Wabasha St. I - 15 bridge requires total reconstruction while the bridges at Tenth St. and at St. Peter St. require lengthening). In this connection, fig. 9 depicts proposed I-35E and the Capitol Approach Complex. Figure 9. Plan View of I-35E and 1-94 Junction at Capitol Approach Complex I - 16 2. Topography, Geology and Land Use a. Topography and Geology Fig. 10 is an adaptation of U.S. Geological Survey maps last revised in 1967 of the proposed project area. Close examination of the figure reveals the influence of the area's topography on the location of facilities in the area. The most notable and clearly evident features of the area are: 1. The steep slopes to the left (looking northward) and the milder slopes to the right of the proposed I-35E alignment. 2. The high bluff area directly north of the Chicago -Milwaukee - St. Paul and Pacific Railroad tracks in the vicinity of Linwood Park. (The bluff is about 110 ft. higher than existing ground near Jefferson Ave. and Victoria St. ) 3. The diagonal orientation (NE or NW) of streets that follow the toe of slope of the bluff and the presence of Lexington Parkway as the primary north -south arterial street in the area. (The inplace Pleasant Ave. corridor which is basically the same as that of proposed I-35E is northeast -southwest. ) 4. The steep slopes between Randolph Ave. and Jefferson Ave. where the connections between the Short Line Road serving the Midway district and proposed I-35E have to be constructed. I - 17 Further reference to fig. 10 suggests that the land areas occupied or proposed to be occupied by I-35E are 1) primarily along a natural physical divide and 2) either open lands of marginal use because of peaty soils and topography or lands used for transportation purposes in the past. The natural divide is the local relief of about 100 ft. that exists between the "bluff" and the "valley" area below. The valley is part of the greater Mississippi River Valley and the bluff represents its north slope. The general openness and low-level use of a significant portion of lands along the proposed I-35E alignment are attributable to the relatively steep side slopes, the presence of the C. M. St. P. & P. R. R. tracks, and a considerable amount of poor quality soils. In the vicinity of Randolph Ave. , swampy material underlay a length of about 1. 1 miles of I-35E. These materials were buried under variable thick- nesses of mineral soil fill. Limestone of the Platteville variety occupies the space below the soil overlays. When present in full, the limestone layer is about 30-32 ft. thick and has a level surface at an elevation of about 795-800 ft. Beneath the limestone, the general geology of the area includes a thin layer (about 5 ft. ) of shale. A sandstone formation referred to as St. Peter Sand- stone underlies the entire area. It requires emphasizing at this point, that the information in the preceding paragraphs is of a general nature and localized conditions different than those described can and do occur. In this instance, slope stability problem areas were discovered uphill from existing Pleasant Ave. along the bluff. Consultant I - 18 ' 1 1111 11117:,1:1.:;* N - T -7 4,,Ar1.211121,....glibER,- ' 'Iltg ..: ,, I. ,. i j ! i 6i Adtg45666:4 IA if; 4 kid ii it . II aii,t,,!k Da; '3:41 or ._ . ' wIlt:ritt: eA. op IPL-2,14 - ,s, milli, . .°11' 1LV° • If • 11sg, ar t• ,q,"1......°..,,...„..,„:r.,..;01.141tm..1_x_ . Y r,% • ,..b . ....k, • ..--' —tell -• ..: — ,.. —,0 IL't..., ,.. .. ' 1. ' ..• , .c, .,,,, , 1,:',..:,;:t.t" .1. 4 'I : 1 Arje: ,, ...1 ,,,=.5. i - • .,..: Nook V,PW.66-__ :,,,e..-;,,,- $401111*6 2.6 au- -4-110t VP .4`k" Ala .... or - '41111," Lim CZ . ww: W.IR '4,6111.111P MI We 11114R11}11.1! t, 0 .1 i Airlitlric -0--..-aa 1111,,,- • , • 4 ii I I I fa I ItO ALI 11111 VIM Ilk ,"•.••=ffik "Ne "w-sr:71to. , 19.iiits UvorintP , N"cittWill_iap*4, Mill 7 rgar-=•., - .;,--liep tor At5=Fir tc.::•.or • 1". tqL°11TV lirr IS ....' .: "•-• trk f.ri ' : v", It ".,-",o, It„..1 Or: MIIP MI VP i .. . • . AM 'IL ••;., :Pi ... :. ...70 • - ', .I- —_,.."--- -----_. ---\•-rv, . .3. ' 1 - ' LL---1•1_*'.°11° 1 Pp .. iI WI, f*ft .,. :66.."•; .L t • , SIPG0.415, W 1 .•I''.Za_,•fTi.AIa,.T.:-."ti.I,.•9i't.•Iit•O",..an.A. ..-s.T.: ' ,e"•.. "gI.,-,.I,..' , ,S,.i'i:..`:0.',I'.-1=.,.. 'i.1IPa-."r'-'"-'f'•,o,i.1 ,.ar1,"l•i.. 'pkrr34V:.e21t.,•.11 • ::1,AN11:Ws I1si ' l.1 • fl.%„. 4wa ' . IV,a -•• ...: 44 PPM rat , .„ ,..... ,., ty, (Al ila .. 1,..ly....1 ,,t0 ,',' - • ..7 ,...../i 1 Yelling.. WI *.'./..1 f 'SIM ITN al ireetskr , ,,,, :-.;1L2::,.7„.....7_,„.,, lt,,....-'11.0a . 1.6. .•!:•.:7.4.... OW] VA,- - "'It; • . `••••.. "Vik $111.1. .1706.6 a 6 in 41111111111 rft frfTf"7 41,7 "likvirn,:r 0„. " #11' - sea uss " tr.• "lb .kr 4. V "-• skkIV aim = r* 0. .64111 MI i‘^ V, 4N 2,1 „,, ' 41“ •,* • •.• !*, 'tr./a:we tvaiwirr.?` ' ;;;;•',' .ett s4116:4" t• mr.. 70 ,7:10,,,a... it :: 7:ra• wnemi:.,.... ,C, 1R14,,' ilifigkilPihr tt'llsit14 r" li .1,41,,..,...‘,". milli 'A 2 a 5 ., „. ,f, a c , . • •• ^ NO V .."31, 01 'limy.. ..., • .,, , .., - ''''' - •0 mik WW4ho 4t ''.'''.:''111;iifr;):11?..t114'111' I'V:t.‘i't!ik7 1 2..'4."-I? 'ILNa':' • 13 ,Lk, A ( ' 11 Ifre 0 1,34 , e, ,,..,„ 4F.:( i' i I • ' i S iv ir 0, --, i' ('' #1•1 4 ,1/4,,,,,„fei 41 ,..-) •,,,,,, Sunfi•A Lak. Peron 5N.1111.11.26. akr omor • , Art tt Ion met n•lt"rtst W h1111111Mitihrow,;, Telt W ' f tie IC%-rokr...11* •17,,e ,77) I ^4, 14111U411164"..... Scale in Feet 2qoo 119111111 7r' mit • Aps— '''Ic04,71267 di ill i'..!:••••11t .743 :6-711 11‘.1111. shT.: TOMS 4.t TIT-MIR! 111 WwW.41.1! .11Ir"...111,31"e1 .11 fr•A Figure 10. U. S. Geological Survey Map of Project Area I- 19 investigations, as well as Minnesota Department of Highways engineers have evaluated the slope stability issues. Remedial work is already complete and a constant monitoring program undertaken following the remedial work indi- cates that the involved areas are stable. (See Section II - Slope Stability) b. Land Use Fig. 11 depicts the zoning that exists in the proposed I-35E corridor. An examination of the figure indicates that the highway traverses basically residential areas except in the sector closest to the I-94 junction where the zoning is commercial. The zoning map shows that the "bluff" area falls into the "A" residence classification whereas the "valley" area is primarily a "B" classification. In addition, C and C1 classification resident districts dot the landscape. The definitions of the classifications appear in Table I-2. Table I-2 St. Paul Residential Zoning Classifications Minimum Required Lot Sizes In Sq. Ft. Classification 1-Family 2-Family 3-Family Residence District A 5, 000 7, 500 Residence District B 4, 000 6, 000 Residence District C 4, 000 6, 000 6, 900* Residence District CI 4, 000 6, 000 7, 650** For additional units, add 900 sq. ft. per unit, except when in excess of 42 units, add 1, 000 sq. ft. per unit. For additional units, add 1, 650 sq. ft. per unit. I - 20 Reference to fig. II illustrates that proposed I-35E would abut the equivalent of approximately 20% of "A" -zoned lands, 70% of "B", "C", and "Cl" lands, and 10% of commercial areas. The majority of "A" lands are hillside areas to the "bluff" side of the freeway, which were uninhabited or sparsely populated at the time of route selection for this link. The primary concentrations of commercial properties affected by I-35E are along Randolph, St. Clair (east side of I-35E only), and Grand Avenues and at the northerly end of the link between Grand Ave. -Ramsey St. and Kellogg Boulevard on the periphery of the Saint Paul Ce ntral Business District. One of the major characteristics of the land use in the bluff area is its historical background. In this connection, the 1973 Minnesota State Legislature designated the area shown in fig. 12 as a historic hill district in Saint Paul (Ramsey County) in an Act which went into effect on May 25, 1973. The historic hill district includes 2 buildings listed in the National Register of Historic Places (see Section II - Historic Sites). The Act relates to historic sites and is an amendment to Sec. 2, Minnesota Statutes 1971, Section 138. 73. The specific section relative to the "hill" appears in subdivision 23. It bears noting, however, that the Act recognizes I-35E construction in that it specifically designates I-35E right-of-way limits (where applicable) as boundaries to the historical area designated. Fig. 13 represents an income profile of the City of Saint Paul. Derived from 1970 U.S. Census Data, the income lines represent the median annual income distribution throughout the City in thousands of dollars. (Median income means that 50% of the people earn less and 50% of the people earn more than the figures given. ) Fig. 13 depicts a typical occurrence in that income levels I - 21 r11111 1111 r INS 111111 MEI NM Ell EN NMI 11111 MN Nil OM NE 111111 INS N N CITY OF ST PAUL, MINNESOTA LIGHT INDUSTRY DISTRICT HEAVY INDUSTRY DISTRICT Figure II. Zoning Map for Project Area rise as one moves away from the City Center (Tract 342 in this case). As one can observe, the highest median incomes are in census tracts 348 and 375 (over $17, 000). The data for the tracts abutting proposed I-35E (tracts 357, 358, 359, 367, 368 and 369)show that the income range is in the $8, 000 - $12, 000 category. However, closer analysis of the data reveal unusual characteristics, particularly in tract 358. In 1969, the annual median income for tract 358 was $9, 591. In the same year, the mean income (average income) in the tract was $22, 416, or a startling 2. 33 times the median income level. This suggests that while half of the families and unrelated individuals in the tract had earnings of $9, 591 or less, the other half had average earnings of $35, 241 or more. A similar pattern exists in tract 357 where the 1969 median income and mean income figures are $12, 913 and $16, 448 per annum respectively. The foregoing data reflect the preponderance of "professionals, managers, and upper income individuals" residing in these tracts. For example, about 42% of the employed in tract 357, and about 37% of the employed in tract 358 fall into such categories. The 1970 census data on mean housing values in tracts 357 and 358 appear in fig. 14. Its purpose is to attempt to correlate the documented income variations in the tracts and their distribution using housing values. Fig. 14 illustrates that mean housing values at the "bluff's" edge are the highest and that the gradient of decline as one moves away from it is relatively steep. I - 23 Mg= r E NM— Oil W lib — UM SIM a— g——— i 1-1 N A rea Jr-1 iLi 1 z Las" nt x �1 Inc, 1 �w L1ls 1 IL _J C-1L_J C 1E i 6601 UEJ 1t IL L_..J1 ]l_._JL.rJE fl 1' 1 [!1EZ Statute Miles O Figure 12. Historical Hill District Limits As Designated by 1973 Minnesota State Legislature St. Paul, Minnesota 310 370 307.01 316 317 1970 CENSUS TRACTS CITY OF ST. PAUL \LL VALUES ARE IN THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS sot 318.01 30702 318.02✓ Scale in feet 1600 0 1600 3200 I 1 Figure 13. City of Saint Paul Median Income Profile in Thousands of Dollars (Source: U.S. Census 1970) I M � [ _1L Are a It u y M I, v�r' r z(`ewe co s I l l r f w s LI. , z f �! scN I I 1111 Mll 1 al1{1t11NYU111411{ I 1 • �IIIIYI IVII 1 11I 1liIEJU111l--t1141171 II If1 rfflommurninumnI -.rim; RAVE ;1 23.2 I SUMMIT = AVE 7y; fl7771 y_i[ PEE �. /I AVE Z;RANp AVE O K P~p \"\•• \ / I L I 1 1358 > O \ IIII1 11 • I 11 I I I I / �92aq 3g3 �J \i\\ `\\`\\\\\SCII '—�,6 IaOAL �`'T�x llW �/II STu \ 7 F I r ,AV ��CC • �pD RICH ERAGE (—�$•-�f$. —= 45.7 p\\\\\ aAN FII s1.3C L8 . r 9 J S\\`\Q a U C DM U E� a //�o Si— S p' _ N„ �I•�A p 40 �- _i'o Bye cp \` I 1 5VF'_ RIORJ I ` JF,, / J SSE ' - 2- 2.5 is•3 ` l ` ✓/ UPERIpR— -ST �LINWpp� —t�BE 22.1 0 30.1 a 41.7j�9 ;�;w °44q:,•�` GAN II I ST� I D/�P . LINWppD� AYE l\ IG N S 3#:7-0 ;� 33 45.0 '" L 45•� D� IST !� /a"L ,� I UlliiinT a g IIINIIHIWiIII`I�\ s, cca p LAIR E VAL E F /��I I AYE I P '�5P tp�, .. • • [rx ▪ 0 PARx wtaYaRJuxa / j jk.\• " ` P / `EMMA�IPt+, yit 5tP BARD 2 nVE. 1 c :� ArGwouxss 1 •0 �' I^ Qa s _ y 6 S Ir�1�II . ?$ a I p l c p • Pta 0 • CI Scale in Feet ALL VALUES ARE IN THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS Figure 14. Housing Values by Block in Selected Parts of Census Tracts 357 and 358 (Source: U.S. Census, 1970) Finally, fig. 15 shows the Saint Paul public school attendance boundaries in the link area prior to the 1972-1973 academic year. It does not show new consolidation plans currently under consideration. However, it does serve to highlight the prevalent neighborhood orientations because school district boundaries are a measure of commonality within the enclosed areas. The thrust of fig. 15 is that the bluff represents a natural divide and that the "bluff" and "flats" families have few communications via educational institutions. Reference to fig. 15 also illustrates the distribution of parks and play- grounds along the I-35E link. There are a total of 11 parks and/or playgrounds involved. The names, locations, approximate areas, and whether proposed I-35E uses land from them or not appear in Tables I-3a and I-3b. Table I-3a lists the parks while Table I-3b gives the playgrounds involved. Table I-3a Parks In Proposed I-35E Link Area Approx. Area -Acres Name 1. Linwood Park 2. Crocus Hill Park 3. Point of View Park 4. Cathedral Park Note: Location St. Clair -Victoria Crocus Pl.-Goodrich Grand -Western Kellogg Blvd. -John Ireland Blvd. About 0. 03 acres of temporary easements along Kellogg Blvd. Cathedral Park not included in Table I-3a. See copy of City of Paul Council Resolutions (C. F. 257626) in Appendix 7. 7. 0 2. 5 2. 0 1. 3 Land Used for I-35E -Acres- 0. 005 at Saint As Table I-3a indicates, a small acreage of land from Cathedral Park has been used for proposed I-35E construction. In this connection the City of Saint Paul has reviewed this park right-of-way acquisition and has gone on record that it does not constitute a major adverse effect to the community. To this end, there is I - 27 a City Council resolution (Council File 257626) of March 7, 1972, which was approved by the Mayor of the City on the same date. Thus, there is no involve- ment of Section 4(f) lands in this link that is apparent. Table I-3b Playgrounds in Proposed I-35E Link Area Approx. Area -Acres Nam e 1. Adams School Pg. 2. Linwood Pg. 3. Palace Pg. 4. St. Clair Pg. 5. Jefferson School Pg. 6. Ramsey Pg. 7. Lindsay School Pg. Location Watson- Pleasant St. Clair -Victoria Jeffer son -View St. Clair -Oneida Sturgis -Western Thompson -Smith Pleasant- Thompson 3. 5 7. 0 6. 0 7. 0 3. 5 3. 0 0. 5 Land Used for I-35E -Acres- 0. 02 0. 09 Reference to Table I-3b shows that proposed I-35E construction requires land from the Jefferson School and Lindsay School playgrounds totalling about 0. 11 acres. The Saint Paul Public Schools have agreed to the acquisition of the necessary lands. In this connection, they indicate that the taking of these lands would not have any notable adverse effects on the operations of the schools or their recreational programs. Correspondence dated November 8, 1971, from the Office of the Consulting Architect on behalf of the Board of Education to the Chief Engineer's Office of the City of Saint Paul outlines this position (See App. 7). In addition to the foregoing, it is necessary to note that the Lindsay School for the Physically Handicapped is in the process of being abandoned. Thus, probably starting with the fall of 1974, there will be no school at the Lindsay site. There should be no Section 4(f) lands involved in the playgrounds. I - 28 EN NM 1— r s--— a I r— 1 M!—— fiil.r LsttLi 1t,SIDE . fN. CTR. a ILir ✓t'LD DEVLP/ f CTR . -- • 0 O 1600 Scale in Feet 0 1600 PUBLIC SCHOOL ATTENDANCE BOUNDARIES ELEMENTARY SPECIAL ELEMENTARY JUNIOR HIGH SENIOR HIGH JUNIOR 87 SENIOR HIGH SPECIAL SECONDARY O N • Figure 15. Public School Attendance (Source, Independent School District Boundaries No. 625) 3. Purpose and Need The purpose of proposed I-35E, apart from any transportation con- siderations, is to provide a direct connection from Interstate Highway 35 to and from the City of Saint Paul so that the "balance" that prevails between the cities of Saint Paul and Minneapolis within the Twin Cities metropolitan area is maintained. This is a major consideration because I-35W provides direct service between I-35 and Minneapolis and to exclude a connection to Saint Paul would result in a shift in metropolitan balance detrimental to the City's standing. Similarly, the easterly counties of Dakota, Ramsey and Washington need high speed connections to the area's major north -south axis transportation route so that they remain competitive with the westerly counties of Anoka, Carver, Scott, and Hennepin. In terms of traffic, the boom -scale development underway in northwestern Dakota County is of importance because I-35E represents the primary north -south freeway scheduled to serve this sector. Travel projections for 1985 indicate that the westerly half of Dakota Co. will generate about 32, 000 vehicles per day inbound along the I-35E corridor to the City of Saint Paul and beyond, with over two-thirds headed towards the Highland and Midway areas of the City. Within the City of Saint Paul, the purpose of I-35E is to provide ease of access to and from the City's major activity centers (e. g. the Central Business District), and to provide a means whereby the residents of the City can avail I - 30 themselves of developing employment, recreational, and educational opportun- ities outside of their immediate community. From a strict traffic need standpoint, the transportation problems in the City are less acute because of the greater availability of public transportation and of a developed arterial street system. Nonetheless, proposed I-35E would relieve a current deficiency in north -south routes in the area the proposed I-35E link traverses. Specifically, these deficiencies relate to the travel demands which would be placed on Lexington Parkway, West Seventh St. , and Shepard Road. (See page I-65 and Section IV for details. ) The 1985 travel projections for proposed I-35E in the West Seventh St. - I-94 junction link in Saint Paul appear in Table I-4. It gives projections for the design year travel (1985). The transportation network used for the travel projections is one referred to as System 16. Table I-4 Average Daily Travel Forecasts On I-35E Link Between West 7th Street and the I-94 Junction Saint Paul, Minnesota Location No. of West 7th St. No. of Randolph Ave. No. of Jefferson Ave. No. of Victoria St. No. of St. Clair Ave. No. of Grand Ave. - Ramsey St. No. of Kellogg Blvd. 1985 ADT 64, 500 34, 500 52, 300 67, 000 75, 100 67, 500 59, 400 Heavy Commercial Vehicles in Link Max. % 6. 2 6. 2 6. 5 6. 2 6. 2 6. 1 6. 1 Data compiled from Minnesota Department of Highways System Planning Report S-53, July 1971 and System 16 forecasts of March 1973. I - 31 From the foregoing, it is apparent that it is necessary to evaluate the project from both a "developing metropolitan" and an "established city" scale of reference. In this connection, one notes that a situation seldom, if ever, occurs where all parts of a metropolitan setting exhibit equal need for a major highway project. Moreover, seldom, if ever, do all parts share equally in the benefits to be derived from such a facility. While the metro area is experiencing population growth, the City of Saint Paul has had a decline in population of about 6500 persons since 1960. While the suburbs of the metropolitan community require transportation faci- lities to "mold" their development patterns, the City faces the problem of how to incorporate new transport routes into its already established city scape. Where newly developing neighborhoods abound in the suburbs, the City concerns itself with renewing its decaying areas and retaining the integrity of its stable ones. At the same time that employment centers are dispersing into a metro - wide pattern, the central business district of Saint Paul is emerging and consolidating as a professional, managerial and financial center with the potential of serving a larger area than before. The preceding paragraph highlights only a few of the factors that are involved in the planning process. Within this framework, the "metropolitan" and "City" considerations taken into account and their details follow. a. Metropolitan Considerations 1. Area Notes The Saint Paul -Minneapolis metropolitan area presents an unusual I - 32 urban setting in that it includes 2 central cities with populations in the 300, 000 - 500, 000 range abutting one another. Consequently, the Twin Cities exhibit development patterns and hierarchal relationships between the central cities and their suburbs different from those of a single center city metro area. The characteristics of the Twin Cities metropolitan area include the following elements. - - Moderate population. Population estimates for the area suggest that a figure of about 2, 000, 000 in 1973 is realistic. (1970 Census was 1, 874, 612). - - Low -to -moderate density development. According to the U.S. Census, the Twin Cities Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA) ranked 19th in population density among the 20 most populous SMSA's in the nation in 1970. The Twin Cities figure was 2, 363 persons per square mile versus a high of 6, 683 per sq. mi. for the New York area. (The Twin Cities central cities showed a 1970 population density of about 7, 000 per sq. mi. ). The above is the result of a moderate -size population spread over a large land area (about 2,100 sq. mi. ). - - Major Diversified Centers . Seven counties (Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott, and Washington) comprise the 1973 metropolitan area (see fig. 16). Within this setting, the planning process has resulted in a decision to encourage the major diversified centers concept of development for the future. The concept envisions a series of major diversified activity I - 33 IN CI'Tlv' I C HOLLYWOOD I WATERTOWN NEVIW GERMANY CAMDEN AYER WALONIA --- 1 CARVER CO I HA,SAN HANOVFR GREENFIELD ROCKFORD INDEPENDENCE CORCORAN ❑LORETTO MEDIMA MAPLE PLAIN 1 ST. FRAMCIS BURNS HANSI? DAYTON CHAMPIIN {'OT15SEO MAPLE GROVE •i HENNEPIN CO. LONG LAK MINNETRISTA MOUND - 2 I I 54OMIEA EIUS /j� 1 ' ( YOUERNICAG ��}, AM NORWOODE 3 I YOUNG AMERICA I WACONIA COLOGNE BENTON LHAATBTIRG tII -- SAN fRANHSCO HAN:orK I --- I DAHLGREN CHASKA CHASKA CARVEP I_1 ACKSON LC1l11SVILLE SAND CREEK ST LAWRENCEI 10RDAN —__+_— BELLE PLAINE BLAKELEY I BELLE PLAINE HELENA I I I NEW PRAGUE' PLYMOUTH ETOMKA DE EPHAVEN EDEN PRAIRIE SHAKOPEE PRIOR LAKE SPRING LAKE BETHEL EAST BETHEL OAK GROVE IANOKA ,HOW COON RAPIDS BROOKLYN PARK NEW HOPE 1 GOLDEN VALLEY RIC MFIELD BLOOMINGTON CREDIT RIVER ___ CEDAR LAKE NEW MARKET NEW MARKET c� L. LK0 MILES 5 10 15 20 25 J v CO I HAM t AKE LEKINGTO ARDEN HILLS L INWOOU COLUMBUS FOREST LAKE FOREST LAKE LINO LAKES CENTERVILLE CIRCLE PINES VADNAIS HEIGHTS 27 N ITE BEAR �I AKE j LITTLE R OSE VIILF CANADArVrii SNOTf iy MAPLW000 - SOAK DAL[ lof 17� III--1` aI RAMSEY COl NEW SCANDIA H MARINE WASHINGTON CO SAINT PAUL 18 MENDOTA HEIGHTS APPLE VALLEY LAKEVILLE INVER GROVE HEIGHTS ROSEMOUNT P,P.RE FARMINGTON ELIREK I CASTLE RC,K COTTAGE GROVE I w•� war R I ..ES 1 Li VERMILLION 1E51 LAKEIAND ST CROIA BEACH 327✓ HAS11N45 HAPON HAMI•IITN -- ---E RAN L/C)._ PH I RANDOLPH GREENVALE IWATERFORI SCp:I n J1 TWIN CITIES METROPOLITAN AREA Political Boundaries,1973 1 SPRING PARK 2 ORONO 3 MINNETONKA BEACH 4 TONKA BAY 5 EXCELSIOR 6 GREENWOOD 7 WOODLAND 8 MEDICINE LAKE 9 VICTORIA 10 ROBBINSDALE 11 SPRING LAKE PARK 12 U. S. GOVT. 13 HILLTOP 14 COLUMBIA HEIGHTS 15 ST. ANTHONY 16 LAUDERDALE 17 FALCON HEIGHTS 18 MENDOTA 19 LILYDALE 20 GREY CLOUD 21 LANDFALL 22 DELLWOOD 23 PINE SPRINGS 24 MAHTOMEDI 25 GEM LAKE 26 BIRCHWOOD 27 WHITE BEAR 28 BAYPORT 29 WILLERNIE 30 OAK PARK HEIGHTS 31 LAKELAND SHORES 32 ST, MARY'S POINT ANSE 0 0NEW TRIER ANOKA —County Township Municipality LJL I MIESYILLE UIII!I:I nti Feb.1973 Fig. 16 The Seven County Metropolitan Area of the Twin Cities I — 34 centers (about 16 to 20) spaced across the metro landscape and interconnected by primary transportation spines. General policies and programs regarding this concept appear in the Metropolitan Council publication, MAJOR DIVERSIFIED CENTERS, Policies, System Plan, Program, which was adopted on February 25, 1971. The publication is a part of the Council's general Metropolitan Development Guide. (In actuality, the selection and encouragement of the major diversified center concept took place in the mid-1960's when the Metropolitan Council's predecessor, the Metropolitan Planning Commission, presented it under the name of "constellation cities". ) -- Competitive Setting. The presence of 2 central cities in the Twin Cities area has fostered competition between Saint Paul and Minneapolis that predates 1900. The "friendly" competition continues with each city attempting to align itself with suburbs where their points of mutual interest coincide. Thus, from a strictly metropolitan balance and hierarchy standpoint, the foregoing translate into an absolute need for providing transportation services to and from the City of Saint Paul via I-35E just as I-35W does to the City of Minneapolis. The basic premise for this statement is that there can be no justification for placing either one of the 2 cities at a competitive disadvantage within the metropolitan community by the denial of comparable means of access. In addition, the metropolitan consideration of giving access to and from the counties of Dakota, Suburban Ramsey, and Washington, which comprise the metro area's easterly sector is no less an important factor. I - 35 -- Growth Prospects. Despite a declining birth rate that may result in a stabilization of population nationally, forecasts for urban centers indicate continued growth unless drastic shifts in public policy take place to induce de -urbanization. In the absence of such shifts, the Twin Cities metropolitan area is likely to experience population growth over the next 30 years. Fig. 17 illustrates the 1972 Metropolitan Council population forecasts for the cities of Saint Paul and Minneapolis and the metropolitan area as a whole. (The Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities Area is an overseer planning agency created by the 1967 Minnesota State Legislature to guide metropolitan development.) As can be observed, projections for the central cities are for relatively stable populations while the metropolitan area's is for an increase of over two-thirds above 1970 levels. Specifically, the central cities in 1970 totalled 724, 380 persons and accounted for 39. 7% of the metro area's 1, 874, 380. The corresponding figures for the year 1990 are projected to be 791, 900, 25. 9%, and 3, 176, 300 respectively. (Fig. 17 also includes a metropolitan area projection made in 1963 by the Metropolitan Council's predecessor agency, the Metropolitan Planning Commission of the Twin Cities. ) The distribution of the projected population increase across the metropolitan landscape appears in fig. 18. From the standpoint of importance to I-35E, the projections for Dakota County are the most significant. In this respect, Metropolitan Council estimates indicate that with the exception of suburban Hennepin Co. , Dakota County will experience the greatest growth I - 36 0 4.0 00 3.0 J J z 0 2.0 1` J o 1.0 0 1000 800 0 z 0 600 1- z 0 400 J a 0 a 200 METROPOLITAN (1963 SEVEN i i AREA PROJECTIONS) -0'"--- COUNTIES, METROPOLITAN / / / AREA COUNTIES (1972 PROJECTIONS) SEVEN MINNEAPOLIS ST. PAUL ------ I 1960 ► ► 1 ► 1970 1980 1990 2000 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 ST. PAUL MINNEAPOLIS METROPOLITAN AREA 313,411 482,872 1,525,297 , 309,980 434,400 1,874,380 311,900 435,100 2,230,100 322,500 443,100 2,687,000 331,500 460,400 3,176,300 Figure 17. St. Paul, Minneapolis, and Metropolitan Area Population Projections (Source: Metropolitan Council) COUNTY 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 ANOKA 85,916 154,556 I93,700 237,500 288,700 CARVER 21,358 28,310 51,100 79,100 120,800 DAKOTA 78,303 139,808 221,800 323,500 423,300 HENNEPIN 842,854 960,080 1,084,200 1,220,900 1,359,600 RAMSEY 422,525 476,255 i--- 517,400 577,300 626,500 SCOTT 21,909 32,423 43,100 62,900 89,900 WASHINGTON 52,432 -82,948 118,800 185,800 267,500 TOTAL 1,525,297 1,874,380 2,230,100 2,687,000 3,176,300 HENNEPIN • RAMSEY DAKO� _ �ANOK ��� -- ..----'--- _ _ - "- .-WASHINGTON __ _ _ - - - - -- CARVER _ - -" - --"."--- SCOTT 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 Figure 18. Minneapolis -St. Paul Metropolitan Area Population Projection By County (Source: Metropolitan Council) I-37 ION MN 111111 11111i 11111 NMI IMO INN Mit am en am am ins ENNEPIN eephavei H 1 co Plymouth Bloom ngtoii • j Shakopee Q Richfield Anthon tittl RAMSEY Men ota He! hts Vadnaia He ghts Inver Glove Heights to Bear v Bi Lake St. Pau Pack GRANT GWASHINGTON Lake Elmo nodbury Cottage Grove Figure 19. Employment Distribution in Selected Parts of the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area (Source, Metropolitan Council and U.S. Census 1970) 1 (numerically and in percentage) within the metropolitan community. Specifically, the projections are for Dakota County populations of 323, 500 in the year 1990 and 423, 300 in 2000. These totals represent increases of about 130% and 203% over the County's 1970 population of 139, 808. The majority of this growth is due to occur in the westerly half of the north and central parts of the county, which cover areas that proposed I-35E is to serve. Current indicators such as investments in sewers and other utilities; commitments for public and private facilities; high level of housing starts (20% of metro area's new starts in 1971); expenditures for new county and state -aid roads suggest that the projections are likely to materialize. (A new $25-million regional zoo in Apple Valley, a $35-million mail handling facility, a major diversified center (Eagandale) which may involve over $100 millions in investments, a $10-million Sperry -Rand Univac complex in Eagan township, and the Eagandale Industrial Park that the Rauenhorst Corp. is currently developing are examples of public and private commitments already made. ) -- Employment Distribution. Fig. 19 shows the employment distri- bution in portions of the Twin Cities metropolitan area for the year 1970. As fig. 19 indicates, the concentrations of employment are in Minneapolis, Saint Paul, the "Midway" area in between, and along the major transportation spines traversing the metro landscape, as well as their junctions with one another. (The suburban developments reflect the move to the suburbs of I - 39 services and offices, even while City C. B. D. s are holding their own and/or improving their competitive stance. According to the U.S. Census of 1970, suburban employment accounts for 47. 5% of total employment in the 15 largest metropolitan areas in the U.S. -- up from 37% in 1960). The foregoing is relevant to I-35E considerations in that it highlights the forces at work in connection with the metropolitan balance and hierarchy referred to earlier. It involves the easterly counties and the City of Saint Paul in general, and the City of Saint Paul - Dakota County relationships in particular. By way of preface, it is necessary to note at this point, that plans and activities are already underway for extending 1-494 across the Minnesota River into Dakota County (an environmental impact statement for this project is being prepared); for constructing a new bridge for T. H. 36 over the Minnesota River to replace an old 2-lane structure there now; and for improving T. H. 55 which leads to the Minneapolis C.B.D. All three of these facilities offer access from developing Dakota Co. to suburban Hennepin Co. and/or Minneapolis. Should there be no 1-35E, then ease of access to and from the employment centers in Saint Paul and the easterly counties would be markedly poorer. In such a situation, despite Dakota County's historic strong socio-economic ties to Saint Paul, the County would have little choice other than to orient toward the west. It is likely to follow that the activity centers along I-494 and at I - 40 a major complex at the junction of I-494 and T. H. 100 in suburban Hennepin Co. evident in fig. 19, as well as the City of Minneapolis will benefit from this superior ease of access while Saint Paul suffers. Similarly, the Midway area employment centers would be without direct access to Dakota Co. resi- dents. In the same vein, employment centers emerging in Dakota Co. , northern Ramsey Co., and Washington Co. would have their drawing power curtailed because of circuitous travel to them rather than high-speed access. Con- sequently, access or lack of it, can help or hinder residents in Saint Paul and in the easterly counties in their sharing of metropolitan opportunities. The net effect to the City of Saint Paul, in particular, is likely to prove detrimental if high-speed access via I-35E does not become a reality. On the one hand, there could be problems associated with realizing in full the impressive revitalization of the City's downtown area brought about by over $150 millions in public and private investments. On the other hand, and more importantly, is the probability that the City and the easterly counties will experience a steady erosion in their sphere of influence in the metropolitan community. 2. Metropolitan Travel Demand In its present form, the Twin Cities represent an automobile -oriented metropolitan area. This is in large measure because the area's major development years have coincided with the emergence of the automobile as the dominant mode of surface transportation. I - 41 Data from a recent transportation survey noted in the 1973 Metropolitan Council Development Guide (MDG) indicate that travel in the metropolitan area totalled about 5, 095, 000 person trips per day in 1970. This corresponds to 2. 7 trips per average day for every man, woman, and child in the metro community. Of this amount, transit vehicles (buses) accounted for 3. 2% of the travel on an area -wide basis (52, 500, 000 riders during the year). However, it is significant to note that on well -served bus routes, bus ridership accounted for about 5. 6% of the affected travel. In addition, on such routes, buses carried about 21% of the trips during the morning 3-hour peak period (6:00 a. m. - 9:00 a. m. ). Fig. 20, taken from the 1973 Metropolitan Council publication, "TRANSPORTATION", Policy Plan, Program, (p. 4) which is part of the MDG, illustrates the person -trips by mode in a typical 24-hour period in the metro- politan area. In addition, fig. 21 from the same publication gives the current distribution of travel across the metropolitan landscape. The numbers given in the figure correspond to the percentage of total person -trips each sector accounts for and the amounts of travel in between. (In 1970 terms, 1. 0% of total travel represents about 50, 000 person trips a day. ) The metropolitan significance of I-35E relates to the travel between Dakota County and Saint Paul, Dakota County and suburban Ramsey County, and between Dakota County and Washington County. Numerically, this travel totalled 2. 1% (1. 65%, 0. 22%, 0. 23%), or about 105, 000 person -trips a day in 1970. I - 42 - IIIII► v - r M !r 11111i r MINI » - - S Person Trips by Mode and Time of Day TRIPS (THOUSANDS) 590 490 390 2907 190 00 SAL TRI 1 I I I2MN 3 6AM. 9 I2N00N 3 6PM. 9 I2MN Figure 20 (Source: Metropolitan Council) Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Person -Trip Distribution Figure 21 (Source: Metropolitan Council) Without question, travel in the metropolitan Twin Cities will increase markedly in the foreseeable future. This will occur despite the constraints of national gasoline "shortages" predicted for the 1973-1976 period. The only existing question is one of forecasting the probable level of magnitude of the increase in total travel and its distribution by mode (automobile, mass transit, walk). Table I-5 gives the 1970 data and forecasts for travel 30 years into the future used in the Metropolitan Council's Development Guide of 1973. (The data for 1970 resulted from a study undertaken by the Transportation Planning Program which is a joint effort of the Metropolitan Council, the Minnesota Department of Highways, the Metropolitan Transit Commission, the seven metropolitan counties, and municipalities in the area. ) Table I - 5 Forecasts of Metropolitan Area Travel Characteristics (Source: Metropolitan Council Development Guide, 1973) Regional Population Regional Households Regional Employment Avg. Daily Person -Trips Avg. Trips/Person Avg. Trips/Hsehd. 1970 1980 1,874,000 2,195,000 573, 271 702, 630 853, 137 1,106,587 5, 095, 000 6, 725, 000 2. 7 3. 1 8. 5 9. 6 1990 2000 2, 560, 000 2, 888, 000 871, 602 1, 029, 986 1, 330, 791 1, 610,281 9, 200, 000 12, 100, 000 3. 5 3. 8 10. 7 11. 8 As Table I - 5 indicates, the forecasts for average daily trips per person are likely to increase to about 3. 5 by the year 1990 and 3. 8 in 2000. I - 44 Coupled with expected population increases, these figures suggest average total travel in the range of 9, 200, 000 and 12, 100, 000 person trips a day, or levels of 81% and 137% respectively above the 1970 totals (2. 7 person trips per day, 5, 095, 000 person trips). The Metropolitan Council states the following in connection with its policy of providing transportation services to the area's residents:* The principal attraction of living in the Metropolitan Area is the diversity of employment, residential, cultural, shopping, educational, entertainment, and business opportunities available here. But people need good mobility. People who depend on transit can only take full advantage of opportunities if transit routes are oriented to all areas. Even the auto user is likely to restrict his activities to one part of the Metropolitan Area if the thoroughfare system does not afford him the ability to move around the entire Metropolitan Area with ease. The planning of transportation facilities should consider mobility needs and the role each transportation mode can play in meeting those needs. (*From "TRANSPORTATION", Policy Plan, Program, p. 8) To be sure, these forecasts do not meet with universal acceptance. The Metropolitan Transit Commission, an agency charged with preparing mass transit plans for the metro area, is on record as suggesting that the figures above are too high. Rather, it is the Transit Commission's contention that for automobile -oriented settings such as the Twin Cities, a general upper figure of 3. 3 person trips per day is more realistic. As a basis for this view, the Commission cites data compiled for the U.S. Department of Transportation by Peat, Marwick, Livingston and Co. in a survey of 60 U.S. cities. On the basis of the data, a general classification of person -trips, for automobile - oriented, public transit -oriented, and mixed Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas (SMSAs) seems plausible (see Table I-6). I - 45 3.4 3.2 3.0 2,8 z 0 cn w 2.6 a cr w 2.4 a c ~ 2.2 1.6 • GREATER THAN 500,000 PERSONS • LESS THAN 500,000 PERSONS, • • .. . • • • 24 .26 .28 .30 .32 .34 .36 .38 AUTOMOBILES PER PERSON 4 0 .4 2 Figure 22. Stratification of Person Trips Per Day as a function of Population and Automobile Ownership in SMSA 's (Source: Peat, Marwick, Livingston and Co.) Table I - 6 Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA) Travel Characteristics SMSA Type Average Number of Trips per Person per Day Public Transit Oriented SMSA Mixed SMSA Automobile -Oriented SMSA 1.6- 2.3 1.9 -2.8 2.2- 3.3 The Peat, Marwick, et. al. data, as reprinted from the Metropolitan Transit Commission publication of January 31, 1973, "TRANSIT DEVELOP- MENT PLAN, 1973-1990, p. 92" appears in fig. 22. It gives the correlation between the parameter, automobiles per person, and the trip -making function in person -trips (per day) per person, from which the data in Table I - 6 were obtained. However, data compiled by the Consultants using State of Minnesota data suggest that automobile ownership rates in the State of Minn- esota and in the Twin Cities metropolitan area are somewhat higher than those indicated in fig. 22. Tables I-7 and I-8 give automobile ownership rates for the State and the Twin Cities respectively. Both sets of data show satisfactory correlation, with automobiles per capita rates in 1972 of 0. 465 for the State and 0. 462 for the metro area. (These numbers are up from 0. 374 and 0. 377 in 1960). If one extends fig. 22 to include the Twin Cities data, the number of person trips per day falls in the 2. 5-to-3. 5 range. Regardless of whether one accepts the Metropolitan Transit Commission data or the data from the Metropolitan Council, the Twin Cities are facing total travel on the order of 8, 500, 000 to 9, 200, 000 person -trips per day in 1990 depending on whether one uses a factor of 3. 3 (M. T. C. ) or 3. 5 (M. C. ) daily trips per person. To accommodate this expected travel, the proposed transportation system consists of a roadway network referred to as System 16 by Metropolitan Planning I - 47 Agencies and a mass transit system. In addition to expressways and arterial streets, the designated freeways in System 16 include I-494 and I-694, which are ring freeways; I-94 and I-394, which represent a primary east -west thor- oughfare; I-35E and I-35W, which are primary north -south routes; and I-335, an intra-urban freeway in Minneapolis. As is the case for I-35E, I-394 and I-335 are currently under study for environmental effects. The mass transit part of the system appears to be either a fixed -guideway advanced -technology people -mover backbone system using large vehicles supplemented by major bus and feeder -bus routes or a fixed -guideway personal rapid transit (PRT) system which uses small vehicles. It is problematical, however, to estimate how soon a decision will be forthcoming on the selection of a transit system for the Twin Cities area, let alone to estimate when it could be expected to be in service over a signi- ficant area. One states this in light of the fact that although most parties agree on the desirability of mass transit, there are deep-seated differences regarding the method to be employed. In any event, none of the transit plans would have any effect on proposed I-35E in the short-term future. This is because the I-35E Corridor is a low -priority transit corridor, with numerous other corridors deserving of greater concern. Travel projections for the year 1985 based on System 16 indicate that I - 48 NMI SO UM BM NIB OM MI M � r Operators Population Licenses Year Thousands % Inc. Thousands 1960 3413.9 1961 3453.0 1.15 1962 3492. 1 1. 13 1963 3531.2 1. 12 1964 3570.3 1. 11 1965 3609.4 1.10 1966 3648.5 1.08 1967 3687.6 1.07 1968 3726.7 1.06 1969 3765.8 1.05 1970 3805.0 1.04 1971 3843. 1 1.00 1972 3881.5 1.00 1800.0 1800.0 1810.0 1825.0 1835.0 1850.0 1900.0 1950.0 2000. 0 2025.0 2050. 0 2125. 0 2150.0 TABLE I-7 STATE OF MINNESOTA POPULATION, OPERATOR'S LICENSES, AND VEHICLE REGISTRATIONS 1960 - 1972 Operator s Licenses per Capita Autos Vehicles Registered In State (Thousands) Trucks Total % of Autos 0. 528 1276.0 260. 3 1536. 3 0. 521 1307. 3 270.2 1577. 5 83. 5 0.519 1356.6 276.8 1633.4 83.0 0. 517 1375. 1 281. 5 1656. 6 83. 0 0. 515 1443. 8 297.3 1741. 1 83.0 0.512 150 6. 2 315.2 1821.4 82.5 0. 520 1552. 5 332. 1 1884. 6 82.4 0.529 1578.8 3 50. 2 1929.0 81.9 0.536 1643.0 370.8 2013.8 81.6 0.538 1694.9 394.0 2088.9 81. 1 0.539 1732.6 411.4 2144.0 80.8 0.553 1782.7 435.0 2217. 7 80. 5 0. 554 1806. 4 443. 7 2250.1 80. 2 Autos Trucks per per Capita Capita 0.374 0. 378 0. 388 0.390 0. 405 0.417 0. 425 0. 428 0. 440 0. 450 0.455 0. 464 0. 465 0. 076 0. 078 0. 079 0. 080 0. 083 0. 087 0.091 0. 095 0. 099 0. 105 0. 108 0. 113 0. 114 Notes: Population figures for 1961 - 1969 are interpolated on a straight-line basis. Source for data are the U.S. Bureau of the Census and the State of Minnesota Department of Highways Motor Vehicle Registration Division. Vehicles per Capita 0. 450 0. 456 0. 467 0. 470 0.488 0. 504 0. 516 0. 523 0. 539 0. 555 0. 563 0. 577 0. 579 u, 0 TABLE 1-8 SEVEN -COUNTY ST. PAUL-MINNEAPOLIS METROPOLITAN AREA POPULATION AND VEHICLE REGISTRATIONS 1960, 1968 - 1971 Vehicles Registered In Seven -County Area (Thousands) Autos Trucks Vehicles Population per per per Year Thousands % Inc. Autos Trucks Total % of Autos Capita Capita Capita 1960 1525.3 - 575.7 65.6 641.3 89.8 0.377 0.043 0.420 1968 1805.0 18.34 799.6 102.4 902.0 88.6 0.443 0.057 0.500 1969 1840.0 1.94 839.0 112.1 951.1 88.2 0.456 0.061 0.517 1970 1874.4 1.87 851.5 114.1 965.6 88.2 0.454 0.061 0.515 1971 1906.3 1.70 880.9 121.7 1002.6 87.9 0.462 0.064 0.526 Note: Population figures for 1968, 1969 and 1971 are interpolated on a straight line basis from data and projections. Source for data are the U. S. Bureau of the Census and the State of Minnesota Department of Highways Motor Vehicle Registration Division. MII In IIIIII e e 4116 MIN VIII N MI MI MI MI 0111111 the traffic load on I-35E, exclusive of transit, will vary between 30, 500 and 75, 000 vehicles per day. In this connection, Dakota Co. travel will range between 30, 500 and 61, 700 vehicles per day. Expected 1985 travel on the "Lexington Ave. Bridge" carrying I-35E over the Mississippi River is 62, 000 vehicles per day. The primary data base for the System 16 projections is the Comprehensive Twin Cities Area Transportation Study (TCATS) of 1958 undertaken as a joint effort by the U.S. Bureau of Public Roads (predecessor to the Federal Highway Administration) and the Minnesota Highway Department. Data update work has since taken place periodically albeit not on the same comprehensive scale of the 1958 work. The forecasting methods used in estimating travel demand included use of the "Fratar" model in the early stages and the "Gravity" model afterwards. The automobile -transit distribution was by the Minnesota Department of Highways "modal -split" model. While all forecasting methods have some shortcomings, the models named and others used represent nationally accepted and widely used methods. Recalling the data in fig. 21 and in Table I-5, one notes that the total combined magnitude of travel between Dakota Co. and Saint Paul, and Dakota Co. and suburban Ramsey Co. in 1970 was 1. 87% (1. 65 + 0. 22) of the total metropolitan travel. If current inter -zonal relationships were to continue, this would translate into 1990 travel between the aforementioned zones of I - 51 about 170, 000 person -trips per day. Applying vehicle -occupancy rates of 1. 5 persons per vehicle, this corresponds to about 115, 000 vehicles per day. A traffic load of this order serving a dispersed population requires the equivalent of about 10-12 freeway lanes, or 30-36 arterial street lanes, or a suitable combination of the two. At the Mississippi River crossing, the facilities proposed to meet such transportation needs, all of which are inplace, include 8 freeway -standard lanes and 10 arterial street lanes. The arterial street bridges (Robert St. - 4 lanes; Wabasha St. - 4 lanes; T. H. 49 High Br. - 2 lanes) are aged structures which in some instances (e. g. High Br.) require replacement. The freeway - standard bridges are the I-35E (Lexington Ave.) and T. H. 56 (Lafayette Ave. ) bridges, with 4 lanes each. These 2 structures currently operate at about one-third and two-thirds of their service capabilities respectively because the highways of which they are a part have yet to be linked to them fully. Thus, the current inventory of roadway facilities consists of 8 freeway lanes and 10 arterial street lanes, considerably short of the facilities nec- essary to meet the forecasted travel needs. Evidence that the lack of access to the Lexington Ave. bridge is a major cause of congestion problems on T. H. 55 (Mendota Bridge) upstream and to its southwest is demonstrable. In addition, statements regarding congestion from Dakota Co. communities appear in I - 52 Appendix 5. In actuality, the rapid growth already underway in Dakota Co. portends of 1985-1990 travel in the 150, 000 - 200, 000 vehicles per day range at the arterial and freeway bridges over the Mississippi River. As a result, if the available facilities are to provide adequate traffic service without expan- sion and/or upgrading, higher riderships per vehicle, improved surveillance and operations, and greater use of public transit vehicles (not necessarily in that order) are necessary. In any event, a shortage of either 2 to 4 freeway lanes or 6 to 12 arterial street lanes would exist just on the basis of the present inter -zonal relationships given in fig. 21 extended to 1985. Thus, it is apparent that the proposed system up to and across the Mississippi River is not an extravagant one regardless of the standard of measure used. In fact, any significant reduction in the number of freeway and arterial lanes at the river would be "crippling" in terms of the movement of persons and goods in the easterly half of the Twin Cities Metropolitan area. Because of the foregoing "metropolitan" considerations, the transpor- tation planning efforts for the Twin Cities have included I-35E as a primary element of the basic freeway network designed to serve the Twin Cities area. In this connection, the Metropolitan Council, while recommending against the construction of freeways in excess of those included in the System 16 I - 53 network, is on record favoring I-35E. Statements regarding the Metropolitan Council's position appear in its Metropolitan Development Guide (MDG) for the years 1971 and 1973. In addition, the Metropolitan Transit Commission has no plans that suggest abandonment of the I-35E freeway in favor of mass transit technology should be considered. Rather, the Transit Commission envisions the use of public transit vehicles (buses) on I-35E lanes to provide service to the emerging activity centers in Dakota County. I - 54 b. City of Saint Paul Considerations The considerations relative to I-35E with respect to the proposed link in the City differ in scope and emphasis from those on the metropolitan scene. The "macro" concepts of metropolitan balance, development, and transportation give way to items of a more local nature affecting the cityscape. Specifically, the prime areas of concern regarding I-35E in Saint Paul are 1) Neighborhoods Served, 2) the Central Business District, and 3) Transportation Needs. 1. Neighborhoods Served. Approximately 25, 000 persons reside in the 6 census tracts directly adjoining the proposed I-35E alignment. Over 30, 000 more persons live within a distance of 2. 5 miles of the freeway. The 50, 000- plus population whom I-35E would serve include the highest -income segments of the city. (On the basis of 1970 Census data, at least 35% of the families in the service area earn over $12, 000 per year. ) Ample evidence exists that these groups are both the most mobile and the least likely to use mass transit modes of transport. Thus, strictly from a service and use standpoint, this suggests that the proposed corridor is one which will receive extensive use by residents of this part of the City. Available travel projections tend to indicate this with a majority of travel on I-35E north of Randolph Ave. attributable to area resi- dents. (The projections are that at least 3 out of 5 vehicles in this corridor are from the area. ) Reference to the land use characteristics given earlier remind one that the proposed alignment abuts the stable and historical "bluff" area. The area includes families with high income levels. It is reasonable to assume that a city would desire to keep such parties and the resource base they represent among I - 55 its residents. However, to use this as the overriding criterion in the evaluation of the proposed freeway would be short-sighted and narrow. The probable effects of the proposed alignment are given in Sections II and IV of this report. The relevant census data appear in Appendix 8. --Opinions About Proposed I-35E in the Neighborhoods Served. The most definite statement one can make regarding prevailing opinions in the neighborhoods served about proposed I-35E is that they vary widely. Both proponents and opponents of the project have been active in the community advocating their own views. In this connection, a statement prepared by Residents in Protest Over I-35E (RIP 35E), a neighborhood citizens organization appears in Appendix 3 . In addition Appendix 4 includes statements from other affected City of Saint Paul organizations. The Consultants have no comments regarding the various stances taken except to state that both sides have expressed valid points in meetings held with them. I - 56 2. The Central Business District. The City of Saint Paul C. B. D. is in the midst of an impressive renewal effort. In excess of $150, 000, 000 has already been invested over the last 10 years. During the same period, the C. B. D. has taken on the character of a financial, managerial, service and government center while retail, wholesale and manufacturing activities have declined. In this connection, the City demonstrates a functional transition that appears typical nationally. The Metropolitan Council forecasts that this trend is likely to continue as it projects increases for the St. Paul C. B. D. in both total employment and office space for the years 1980 and 1990. Specifically, the Metropolitan Council data appear in Table I - 9. The data in Table I - 9 highlight the domination of government - related and finance -related office space and employment in the Saint Paul C. B. D. Together, the two categories combine to account for 65. 6% of the net office space and 38. 6% of the employment in 1970. The corresponding figures forecast for 1990 are 73. 7% and 51. 2% respectively. It is realistic to assume that ease of access to the Saint Paul C. B. D. would be a factor in the capability of the private sector, in particular, to realize the projections given. I - 57 TABLE I-9 OFFICE SPACE AND EMPLOYMENT FORECASTS FOR THE SAINT PAUL CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT 1970, 1980, 1990 Total Net Office Space in Sq. Ft. Federal, State, Local Gov't. Net Space in Sq. Ft. Percentage of Gov't. Office Space of Total Finance, Insurance, Real Estate Net Space in Sq. Ft. Percentage of Fin. , Ins. , Real Est. Office Space of Total 1970 6, 604, 000 2, 690, 000 40. 7% 1, 647, 000 24. 9% Total Employment 59, 024 Government Employment and Percentage of Total Finance et. al. Employment and Percentage of Total Rounded to nearest 100 employees 13, 974 (23.6%) 8, 856 (15. 0%) 1980 1990 8, 040, 000 8, 460, 000 3, 575, 000 4, 170, 000 44. 5% 49. 2% 2,072,000 2,072,000 25. 8% 24. 5% 63, 700* 67, 700 19, 700* (30. 9%) 9, 400* (14. 8%) 25, 000* (36. 9%) 9, 700* (14. 3%) Data are from OFFICE SPACE: AN INVENTORY AND FORECAST FOR THE TWIN CITIES METROPOLITAN AREA, JUNE, 1973. Report prepared by the Metropolitan Council Staff. I - 58 --Opinions About Proposed I-35E in the C. B. D. In order to determine the views prevalent in the C. B. D. , Mid -Continent Surveys of Minneapolis, Mn. conducted a personal interview survey which included leaders and represent- atives in 7 business service categories. The 23-question survey results appear in their entirety in Appendix 1. The total sample involved 104 persons, most of whom are persons in leadership positions. The 7 categories covered are 1) retail, 2) finance and insurance, 3) business offices, 4) legal, 5) entertainment, 6) property and building manage- ment, and 7) medical. The first 6 category sample sizes afforded a sufficiently large coverage so that the responses could be considered as representative. The last category - medical - with only 4 responders to interviews involve a statistically insignificant sample size. The actual interviewing for the survey took place in March of 1973. At that time, presumably a greater number of persons in the community were aware of the I-35E-associated problems than if such a survey had been taken a year earlier. Reference to Appendix 1 illustrates that 73% of the 104 respondents think that the freeway system has been good for downtown Saint Paul (Ques. 3). Significantly, in the finance and insurance (85%), business offices (90%), entertainment (80%), and property and building management (80%) categories, the positive responses exceed the total sample average. This reflects the expectation that the downtown area will be more of a finance, business, and entertainment center rather than one of a growing retail center. I - 59 Furthermore, the responses to Question 19 regarding what the responders expected Saint Paul would be like in a few years if there were no I-35E built are noteworthy. To this question, 7% responded that it would be favorable for the City while 51% stated that it would be harmful to the community. The survey results generally agree with those determined in a 1971 study prepared by the North Star Research and Development Institute for the Minnesota Department of Highways. The study, entitled "The Economic Impact of the Freeway System on the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area", noted that: "The improved position of the CBD in respect to financial and pro- fessional uses appears to be due to the strong agglomerating forces operating in these professions. Face-to-face contact and close proximity are important in financial and professional services and made concentration in one area desirable. The freeways, by improving the accessibility of the CBD, facilitate its development as a financial and professional center." Similarly, with respect to retail sales, while the C. B. D. retail sales have declined (in terms of constant dollars), the study found that store managers in the CBDs felt that freeways have had an ameliorating effect on the decline of retail business by providing vitally important access to stores in the downtown areas. I - 60 3. Transportation. The area -wide increase in travel documented by transportation surveys over the last decade is evident within City of Saint Paul boundaries as well. Despite a virtual standstill in the City's population, data compiled from official City traffic maps show general increases in travel on both east -west and north -south arterial streets between 1960 and 1970. In the area to be served by proposed I-35E - the section of the City to the southwest of its C. B.D. - the increases are mixed. Average traffic on the north -south arterial streets (Snelling Ave. , Lexington Parkway, Dale St. ) over the 10-year period grew about 40%. On the other hand, east -west arterial street traffic grew about 7% between 1960 and 1965 and declined about 30% between 1965 and 1970. The east -west arterial streets used for this analysis are Randolph Ave. , Jefferson Ave. , St. Clair Ave. , Grand Ave. , Summit Ave. ; and Marshall Ave. from Snelling Ave. on the west to proposed I-35E to the east. Data compiled from the City traffic maps appear in Table I-10. The travel figures reflect the relative abundance of east -west arterial streets in contrast with the limited number of north -south ones. Numerically, these translate into a situation where, prior to the advent of the freeway system in 1960, there were at least 28 east -west arterial street lanes compared to at most 16 (Hamline Ave. included) on a north -south axis serving the same area. In addition, about 10 lanes were available (West 7th St. and Pleasant Ave. ) along a northeast -southwest diagonal close to the downtown area. As noted earlier, the presence of the diagonals results from the directional configuration of the Mississippi River and the topographic constraints of the "bluff' area. I - 61 TABLE I-10 CITY OF ST. PAUL ARTERIAL STREET TRAFFIC VOLUMES EAST -WEST ARTERIALS (Between Snelling Ave. and Proposed I-35E) 1957 1960 1965 Randolph Jefferson St. Clair 4, 640 - 6, 550 - 5, 410 - 8, 620 9, 260 6, 150 Grand 8, 175 - 8, 480 Summit 13, 720 - 15, 850 Marshall 6, 980 - 17, 840 Average of Total: 55, 800 3, 350 - 7, 210 4, 630 - 8, 260 4, 790 - 5, 925 7, 100 - 9, 140 12, 725 - 15, 850 6, 840 - 17, 840 51, 800 NORTH -SOUTH ARTERIALS (Between Montreal Ave. 4, 720 - 8, 100 3,425 - 6,618 4, 705 - 8, 260 5, 600 - 9, 330 11, 320 - 17, 300 17, 170 - 14, 670 55, 600 and 1 - 94 ) Snelling 11, 510 - 21, 615 11, 510 - 21, 615 11, 170 - 20, 950 Lexington 3, 870 - 18, 600 3, 510 - 18, 000 5, 230 - 18, 000 Dale 5, 130 - 9, 390 5, 130 - 9, 390 6, 480 - 12, 280 Average of Total: 35, 000 35, 000 37, 000 N NORTHEAST -SOUTHWEST ARTERIALS (Between S.W. Ends and the West 7th St. Shepard Rd. 11, 975 - 18, 310 3, 425 SELECTED ROUTES 11, 975 - 18, 310 5, 550 University Ave. (Between Snelling Ave. and Rice St. ) University 30, 000 - 33, 110 28, 000 - 34, 300 Average of Total: 31, 600 31, 200 INTERSTATE ROUTES I-94 (E-W) I-35E (N-S) Total 11, 245 - 22, 540 9, 850 - 14, 760 28, 000 - 33, 150 30, 600 27, 450 1970 1972 7,310 - 8,300 7, 110 - 7,700 2, 950 - 5, 800 2, 225 - 4, 850 5, 025 - 6, 300 5, 025 - 6, 475 6, 150 - 9, 350 7, 900 - 9, 800 6, 725 - 10, 200 6, 850 - 10, 200 4, 250 - 6, 875 4, 450 - 6, 875 39, 600 39, 700 16, 625 - 34, 725 7, 150 - 21, 250 5, 700 - 13, 400 49, 400 16, 925 - 34, 725 5, 500 - 21, 250 8, 875 - 12, 600 49, 900 Central Business District) Notes: Where identical counts appear in different years, it is because Averages are rounded to nearest one hundred vehicles per day. Data are from official City of Saint Paul Traffic Maps. 12, 540 - 13, 025 11, 100 - 15,475 20, 200 - 23, 600 21, 900 79, 825 9,010 88, 800 an update for the 8, 525 - 13, 025 13, 675 - 17, 175 17, 980 - 25, 025 21, 800 85, 500 14, 700 100, 200 link had not been completed. NM E r- N r 11111-- 11111- MN MI EN ON i NM - - Fig. 23 is a reproduction of selected parts of the 1972 City of Saint Paul traffic map, which illustrates the magnitude of travel in the project area. Reference to table I-10 indicates the influence of east -west I-94 on the east -west arterials. The drop in travel on adjoining arterial streets (i. e. Marshall and Summit Aves.) is apparent. Assuming a 30% new traffic genera- tion and true interstate type of travel factor and a half-and-half distribution to the arterials north and south of I-94, the volume of traffic cast on the arterial streets listed would still total 30, 000 vehicles per day or more. Such an occurrence would place travel on each and every one of them at their estimated average capacities of 12, 000 - 14, 000 vehicles per day. This suggests that, in the absence of I-94, the east -west arterials would have been experiencing costly and generally unacceptable levels of congestion in the year 1972. Travel projections for 1985 in the project area on the basis of a do- nothing alternative appear in fig. 24. They indicate traffic levels of 23, 500 vehicles per day on South Lexington Parkway; between 19, 000 and 23, 000 vehicles per day on a long stretch of West 7th St. ; and between 35, 700 and 40, 200 on Shepard Road. These figures correspond to multiples of about 2. 4, 1. 5 - 1. 8, and 2. 0 - 2. 3 over their 1972 traffic loads respectively. In their present form, it is beyond the capabilities of the streets named to handle such volumes. In comparison, if I-35E is constructed, the travel forecasts for 1985 I - 63 - 2,975 /2-7/ 23,250 25,025 35, 5 36'9 /1-68 2 69 1/y %3 342-69 ST ANTHONY �3,337 AVE /2-70 50 y 550 )470 /1-7D /)70 2 600 11-42 10,650 5,4p 47/ 2�75 9850 4 SELBY AVE 669 840-T2 492 4225 7-693 4508, 900 9-69\ 4-72 2/69Ci75 70 70 4-70 /0-72 292 90 SUMMIT AVE. 8,000 / 215aGRAND// 7AVE. 7,550 9-7/ 26050 72 ST. CLAIR AVE. 5,500 7-69 /)-70 3,500 7-72 4,850 6-70 155225 6,600 5 ,9 9-7/ 6,4070 9 / 21150 4,800 �� 4-72 JEFFERSON AVE. 2,250 3-72 21 550 4,550 3-70 4 72 RANDOLPH AVE. 7,110 8-70 18,620 8-70 W 2 2 J 2 W N HIGHLAND -J 8,500 11-7/ 8,400 7950 4-72 4-72 6/-72,100 1 200 7/ 4Y6'9 p a 6,300 7-69 /y(< 9a69 2 225 3-72 6,745 8- 70 2 950 1 725 1-72 3-7/ 16725 2 2-72 22-72 2-72 �5,125 MONTREAALo AVE. 9-72 8-70 730 -8 2 -72 3725 4,035 /7/\ 3-72 050 00,,225 / 72 R}72 7,700 6-70 9,425 2-7/ 2 075 &72 2 0 1- (7 2 6,925 (n 3,550 2-72 cjy/12-7/ 13,255 y� EDGCUMBE RD. / eao 1115 8-70 �,� O 4 '/07572 .4 1,825% 72 `3-17 325 -_ /2-7/ p 15 875 _18,250 4-7/ CENTRAL o /1-70 7//875 -70 1,725 4450 9-70 6,150 5-72 1-72 MARSHALL U1 2 4 1,7 2,600 7JQ 1, 8 69 9,800 4-72 4850 3-72 1,800 5-72 4 7,085 O 8-70 1- 0 7 1,450 5 72 r 8,750 N 9- , 743 4-6812, 19,800 1475 //-70 7675 6,925 9-72 2,700 2-7/ 1725 1775 5 2-7/ 9-72 6,225 3,250 9-72 /0-69 /0-72 725 69 1 � 18,850 4-69 z65$ 0 LE 850 4-72 2,125 9-72 5 9Y-00 2 5375 99,775-72 /0-69 9,925 272 4-70 1,550 175 6,69 5-69 2275 16,100 1 5,-72 71 4,750 4 250 3-72 22- 90069 1 3/2-07/0 15250 4-72 14 700 4-7/ - Scale in Feet 1000 0 1000 2000 17,325 3-72 8325 1 7/ 1,350 2 7/ U) 4 12,55-680 W - IAI75 �// 0 0 4,350 3-72 4-72 5.550 5,225 10-69 122,507/0 - 3,750 9-68 17 175 3-72 1100 (77 6-71 3)25 2 5 875 9-69 13 025 j 69 400 �72 0 r5 350 /-69 CITY OF ST. PAUL DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS TRAFFIC BUREAU TRAFFIC VOLUME FLOW MAP EXPLANATION 3,657 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES 6-70 DATE OF SURVEY Figure 23. Actual Travel in Project Area, 1972 (Source: City of St. Paul Traffic Bureau) I - 64 - - - r is - - - - - - 1 MIN NE S - NM NM I 0) (71 (18.0) EFFERSON AVE. Id (24.2) 4:P BLVb. ( ) AVERAGE DAILY TRAVEL IN 1000 VEHICLES PER DAY 1600 SCALE IN FEET 0 1600 3200 Figure 24. Travel Forecasts for 1985 with Do -Nothing Alternate no me MI NM s OM O - NS MR am-- mg ma gm r■ No MARSHA (11.4) (11.9) (17.9) (12.2) (13.6) (14.8) 00 00 (10.7) SUMMIT AVE. 4j, 15.9) (13.0) fi 0 • (15.0) (12.7) 12.6) (11.0) GRAND AVE. (14.6) ST. CLAIR AVE. 0 JEFFERSON AVE. T (15.5)V RANDO 44.7) (19.2) (16.9) HACMLINE ( 3.1) NINO (17.9) (18.3) .a. (7.0) / de deS)/ (26.4) / /(10.2) / (2.0) (2.3) (1.7) CC 0 r- (3.1) I,1 BA ' D AVE .2� (24.8) RLVD, ( ) AVERAGE DAILY TRAVEL IN 1000 VEHICLES PER DAY 1600 SCALE IN FEET 0 1 1600 3200 Figure 25. Travel Forecasts for 1985-Alternate 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 e 1 1 1 1 1 in the same area are given in fig. 2 5. As can be observed, the projected levels of travel are 9, 700, 3, 000 - 4, 300, and 15, 200 vehicles per day on Lexington Ave. , West 7th and Shepard Road respectively. These are levels of travel less than 1972 levels and the case of West 7th St. represents a drastic reduction to about one-third of current volume. In this regard, proposed I-35E would improve travel on existing north -south and northeast - southwest arterial streets in the project area. At this point, it requires reemphasizing that proposed I-35E serves not only the adjacent tracts, but the Highland and Midway areas as well. Thus, it is necessary to look at the origins and destinations of the users of this link. Computer projections for 1985 based on origin -destination analyses indicate that the area would receive service from the proposed freeway. The estimates are that over two-thirds (71%) of the users on I-35E north of Randolph Ave. would be Saint Paul residents. Even if one allows for the possibility that the data are in error by 30% (unlikely in a stable urban setting), at least half of the users would still be Saint Paulites. The data indicate that the largest segment of travel that would be expected on I-35E north of Randolph Ave. has destinations in northeastern Ramsey Co. (30%). Traffic bound to the C. B.D. constitutes less than one-fourth (23%) of the total. The remaining destinations are Northwest area (west of I-35E and south of I-694) — 20%; North and East of I-694 — 19%; and East of I-35E and South of I-94 — 8%. 1 I - 67 The first point highlighted here is that despite increases forecast for C.B.D. employment, an increasing number of City residents are likely to travel to -and -from non-C.B.D. activity centers. This trend has already appeared in U.S. Census data. The second point is that C.B.D. -oriented travel from Census tracts close to the city -center has a desirably high public transit ridership, thus negating the use of automobiles. (See Appendix 8 for data. ) The third point relative to I-35E is that while it would relieve con- gestion on north -south arterial street travel in the project area, it will attract heavier traffic loads on the east -west arterial streets than otherwise would be expected. This is especially true in the cases of Randolph and St. Clair Avenues. Reference to fig. 25 illustrates that between Hamline Ave. and proposed I- 35E, traffic loads on the 2 streets are about 23,100 and between 14, 700 and 26, 400 respectively. The ramifications and remarks regarding this situation are topics discussed in Section IV of this report. The final point deserving of emphasis and consideration is the Short Line Road, a City of Saint Paul arterial route that has the task of providing service to the Midway area to and from I-35E. The connection to I-35E occurs in the vicinity of Randolph Ave. (see fig. 25). At present the Short Line Road ends at Selby Ave. Travel forecasts for 1985 indicate traffic loads in the 28, 000 - 30, 000 vehicles per day range. If the Short Line Road is to function as an integral part of the City's transportation system, its low - capacity northerly end at Selby Ave. requires connecting to another arterial route such as Snelling Ave. I - 68 4. Regional and Community Benefits and Costs The benefits and costs associated with a freeway such as I- 35E are both tangible and intangible. The tangible benefits are generally in the areas of economic impact, traffic safety and "congestion" relief. The primary intangible benefit is in the area of the improvement in mobility of the labor force, both urban and rural. On the other hand, the major costs of I-35E are in the area of social disruption. a. Economic Impact. In the category of economic impact, the afore- mentioned 1971 study by the North Star Research and Development Institute, "The Economic Impact of the Freeways on the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area" provides specific data with respect to 3 segments (I-35W, I-94 and I-494) of the Twin Cities freeway system. The categories of activity covered in the study include 1) land use, changes and potential, 2) effects on retail trade, 3) residential property values, 4) alteration of property tax patterns, 5) impact on commercial and industrial freight, and 6) general economic impact on the community. A brief review of the North Star study results follow: — Land Use Changes. In the City of Minneapolis, the number of dwelling units removed for freeway right-of-way was less than the number of units constructed after the freeway was inplace. It is necessary to note, however, that there was a change in the type of dwellings with a definite shift from single-family units to multiple -family ones. I - 69 — Effects On Retail Trade. Retail sales in the C. B. D. s declined while suburban retail operations increased. However, C. B. D. retailers felt the decline would have been sharper without the freeways. In Saint Paul, the share of total retail trade in the City accounted for by the C. B. D. declined from 28. 7% to 20. 3% between 1954 and 1967. — Residential Property Values. With the exception of streets directly adjacent to the freeway, few direct freeway effects on residential property values were discernible. On the adjacent streets, a relative decline as measured by slower growth in value was noticeable. — Alteration of Property Tax Patterns. In Minneapolis, the freeways accounted for a loss of 2. 4% in the tax base and 54% of all properties removed from tax rolls between 1956 and 1968. The tax loss was recovered rapidly through overall growth. — Impact On Commercial and Industrial Freight. According to the North Star R & D Institute, the annual savings attributable to freeways in the study area total between $50 and $100 million per year. This represents about 8% of total operating costs for all commercial vehicles driving on urban roads in Minnesota. — General Economic Impact On The Community. Traffic volumes on City arterial streets have declined by about 25% - 40%. Accident cost savings due to freeway use total between $10 million to $12 millions per year. I - 70 The indications are that, from a metropolitan standpoint, the North Star study results will apply to the I-35E case as well. The development patterns emerging in Dakota Co. alone attest to the general economic benefits for the Twin Cities area. The planned urbanization of the county is without question an economically significant occurrence. To quantify the benefits to the City of Saint Paul, however, requires identifying the costs associated with I-35E. These costs are most prominent in terms of the area of land removed for the proposed freeway construction and the amount of taxes lost as a result. To date, 663 parcels of land totalling about 109 acres have been acquired for the construction of I-35E between West 7th St. and the 1-94 junction. (This represents approximately 0. 33% of the City's 33, 000 acre land area). Of this total, about 38 acres or 35% were public and/or non-taxable lands. The acreages by City Plat designations appear in Table I-11. There is no apparent indication that the public lands involve Section 4(f) lands. Table I- 12 gives the pattern of tax rates on residential properties in Ward 5 of the City for the years (taxes payable) 1961 through 1973. Ward 5 encompasses the majority of the I-35E link right-of-way. The data reflect the changes in the rates created by legislative action in the State of Minnesota. Table I-13 lists right-of-way acquisitions by year, the taxes the acquired properties were required to pay for the year of acquisition, and the tax rate as a percentage of market value. To establish a basis for comparison, the purchases and taxes have been adjusted to 1972 dollars using data in Table 1-12 I - 71 LOCATION TABLE - I- 11 RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUIRED FOR PROPOSED I-35E IN ST. PAUL (WEST 7th ST. TO CAPITOL APPROACH) 1958 - 1972 Public and/or Non- Taxable Private Land Private Land Sq. Ft. Acre Sq. Ft. Acre 1. West End Addition 39, 854 0. 915 ---- 2. Birmingham's 4th Addition 232, 547 5. 339 ---- 3. Woodford Park Addition 48, 625 1. 116 4. Lexington Park - Plat 4 132, 854 3. 050 59, 972 1. 377 5. Lexington Park - Plat 11 54, 840 1. 259 ---- 6. Nelson Park Addition 32, 333 0. 742 3, 040 0. 070 7. Gage and Whitney's Addition 3, 512 0. 081 8. Cole's Rearrangement 5, 236 0. 120 10, 950 0. 251 9. Cole's Randolph St. and Pleasant 35, 970 0. 826 Ave. Addition 10. Howard Greene's 2nd Addition 70, 635 1. 622 11. Michel and Robertson's Addition 165, 468 3. 799 25, 678 0. 589 12. Washington Heights Addition 45, 198 1. 038 24, 183 0. 555 13. Ridgewood Park Addition 325, 033 7. 462 727, 709 16. 706 14. Slayton's Linwood Park Addition 35, 689 0. 819 74, 420 1. 708 15. Dawson's Subdivision 79, 784 1. 832 17, 813 0.409 16. Pioneer Real Estate and Building 1, 000 0. 023 ---- Society Subdivision 17. A. Vance Brown's Subdivision 120, 671 2. 770 96, 693 2. 220 18. Ramsey's Subdivision 8, 716 0. 200 19. Stinson's Subdivision 52, 364 1. 202 20. Highland Park Addition 43, 094 0. 989 21. Rearrangement of Highland Park 177, 413 4. 073 2, 000 0. 046 22. Norwood Addition 36, 627 0. 841 9, 360 0.215 23. Stinson, Brown and Ramsey's 10, 870 0. 250 263, 870 6. 058 Addition 24. Wright's Addition 86, 794 1. 993 5, 103 0. 117 25. Terrace Park Addition 113, 695 3. 069 41, 712 0. 958 26. Hawke's Subdivision 6, 790 0. 156 18, 975 0. 436 27. Whitacre, Brisbane, and Mullen's 263, 131 6. 041 110 0. 003 Subdivision 28. Dayton and Irvine's Addition 412, 481 9. 469 169, 870 3. 900 29. Irvine's Enlargement 338, 214 7. 764 74, 390 1. 708 30. Turnbull's Subdivision "A" 15, 989 0. 367 3, 099 0. 071 31. Auditor's Subdivision 10 44, 508 1. 022 32. Rearrangement of Block 62 11, 300 0. 259 (Irvine's Enlargement) 33. Fisher's Rearrangement 16, 249 0. 373 34. Miscellaneous 43, 560 1. 000 GRAND TOTAL TOTAL ACRES I - 72 70. 859 38.419 109. 278 I I MN r NI NS ON NW I NO ON NW Mt ON s NM NO NO ON Function of Base Year TABLE - I- 12 TAX DATA ON RESIDENTIAL REAL ESTATE FOR PROPERTIES IN WARD 5, CITY OF ST. PAUL 1961 - 1973 BASE YEAR TAX PAYABLE 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1961 100. 0 1962 102. 3 100 1963 108.3 105.8 100 1964 113.9 111.3 105. 1 100 1965 123.3 120. 5 113. 8 108. 2 100 1966 126.8 123. 9 1 17. 0 111.3 102.8 100 1967 131.6 128.6 121. 5 1 15. 5 106.7 103.7 100 1968 95.0 92.8 87.7 83.4 77.0 74.9 72. 1 100 1969 101.8 99.5 93.9 89.3 82.5 80.2 77.3 107. 1 100 1970 109.5 107.0 101. 1 96. 1 88. 8 86. 3 83. 2 115. 2 107. 5 100 1971 190. 7 186. 4 176. 0 167. 4 154. 6 150. 3 144. 9 200. 7 187. 3 174. 1 100 1972 170. 1 166.2 157. 0 149, 3 137. 9 134. 4 129. 2 179. 0 167. 0 155. 3 89. 1 100 1973 198. 1 193. 6 182. 9 173. 9 160. 6 156.2 150. 5 208. 5 194. 5 180. 9 103. 8 116.4 Notes: Table reflects Homestead Credit enacted by 1967 State Legislature and Property revaluation for taxes payable in 1971. Taxes payable for any year are for the preceding year. Chart Explanation: An owner -occupied residential property with taxes payable of $100. 00 in 1960 had taxes payable of $126. 80 in 1966; $109. 50 in 1970; and $198. 10 in 1973. Taxes payable represent the total tax amount including special assessments and other items. Data Source: City of St. Paul Tax Records. Chart data compiled by the Saint Paul Bureau of Valuations in April 1973. J 1,4 TABLE - I- 1 3 RIGHT-OF-WAY PURCHASES AND REAL ESTATE TAXES I-35E Alignment From West 7th St. to the 1-94 Junction in St. Paul 1958 - 1972 (All Values in Thousands of Dollars) R/W Purchases Adjusted Actual R/W Purchases to 1972 Dollars Real Taxable Non -Taxable Taxable Non -Taxable Estate Year Properties Properties Total Properties Properties Total Taxes Real Estate Taxes Taxes As A Lost Percentage of Thru Market Value -1972** 1958 2.0 2.0 2.9 - 2.9 0. 1 2.0 5.00 1959 --- - 1960 75. 1 75.1 106.3 - 106.3 1.3 25.7 1.73 1961 131.6 131.6 183.5 -- 183.5 5.9 105.9 4.48 1962 466.8 - 466.8 643.8 - 643.8 7.2 112.7 1.54 1963 466. 1 - 466. 1 634.5 634.5 10.2 138.8 2. 19 1964 851.5 6.1 857.6 1141.2 8.2 1149.4 23.2 267.3 2.72 1965 2539.0 55.6 2594.6 3341.3 73.2 3414.5 60.0 583.4 2.36 1966 1450.6 138.9 1589.5 1857.4 177.8 2035.5 37.3 303. 5 2.57 1967 867. 1 139.2 1006.3 1075.8 172.7 1248.5 31.7 302.9 3.66 1968 1166.7 137.6 1304.3 1391.7 164. 1 1555.8 33.3 259.9 2.85 1969 68.4 26.5 94.9 77.8 30.2 108.0 2.1 13.0 3.07 1970 696.9 555.5 1252.4 751.5 599.0 1350.5 23. 1 67.9 3.31 1971 6.5 215.2 221.7 6.7 221.8 228.5 5.0 10.2 77.. 12 1972 302.6 302.6 302.6 302.6 12.6 12.3 4. 16 Totals 9090.9 1274.6 10365.5 11517.0 1447.0 12964.3 253.0 2338.1 (87. 7%) (12. 3%) (100. 0%) (88. 8%) (11. 2%) (100. 0%) (Actual) 1972 Dollars Basis for adjustments to 1972 dollars is the "Implicit price deflator"for total GNP index (1958 = 100) published by the U.S. Government. Taxes lost computed by applying tax trends given in Table I- 12 and adjusted to 1972 dollars. 2. 78% (Avg. ) G NS 111111 NM MI SS S NS I M S INM IND and the Gross National Product index, "Implicit Price Deflator", published by the U.S. Government. Reference to Table I-13 shows that right-of-way acquisitions have cost $10, 365, 725 ($10, 365, 500in table occurs due to rounding out to $100). In 1972 dollars, this is the equivalent of $12, 964, 300. Taxable properties comprised 87. 7% and 88. 8% of the total costs and adjusted 1972 costs respectively. In addition, Table I-13 indicates that a total of $2, 338, 100 in 1972 dollars have been lost to the City of Saint Paul over the preceding 15 years. The table also shows that the real estate tax rates in the same period have hovered around 3. 0% or less. If one uses a real estate tax rate of 3. 0% to 4. 0%, this trans- lates into a loss in tax revenues of about $350, 000 to $450, 000 per year from a non-use of this land. The City of Saint Paul valuations for the "tax payable" years of 1965 through 1973 appear in Table I- 14. The "tax payable" year is for the preceding year (i. e. 1970 taxes are paid in 1971). The table shows that the City's valuation in 1972 was $752, 200, 000. Table I-14 also illustrates the role that the City of St. Paul Central Business District plays in the City's total tax base. In large measure, Ward 4 of the City approximates the C. B. D. boundaries. The data in Table I- 14 suggest that the C. B. D. taxable values between the years of 1970 and 1973 ranged from a low of $157, 700, 000 in 1970 to a I - 75 high of $172, 800, 000 in 1973. These values represented about 24. 5% and 22. 9% respectively of the City's total tax base. (Note: The sharp increase in the City's total valuation between the years 1970 and 1971 was the result of property value adjustments ordered by the Minnesota State Legislature.) The 22% - 23% range for the years 1972 and 1973 appears more typical than the nearly 25% C. B. D. to City valuations ratio of 1970. In addition to the foregoing, Table I- 14 indicates that the non-taxable public buildings and lands in Ward 4 totalled $98, 600, 000 in 1970 and $119, 500, 000 in 1973. These high amounts reflect the important role that government plays in the Capital City's employment structure. TABLE - I- 14 CITY OF SAINT PAUL AND WARD 4 VALUATIONS (1965 - 1973 Tax Payable Years) Ward 4 Ward 4 Saint Paul Taxable Value Non-taxable Value Year Taxable Value and % of St. Paul and % of St. Paul 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 $620. 2 628. 4 638. 1 617. 7 628. 0 642. 1 737. 0 755. 0 752. 2 $157. 7 (24. 5%) 161.8 (21. 9%) 170. 0 (22. 6%) 172. 1 (22. 9%) $ 98. 6 (15. 4%) 109. 9 (14. 9%) 111. 7 (14. 8%) 119. 5 (15. 9%) Notes: 1) All values are in millions of dollars and are rounded to the nearest $100, 000 2) Ward 4 includes the major portion of the St. Paul Central Business District (Kellogg Blvd. - Summit Ave. - 13th St. - Jackson St. ) 1- 76 b. Traffic safety and congestion relief are quantifiable benefits. National Safety Council (NSC) figures (1972) for the cost of an accident resulting in a fatality, an injury, and property damages only are $46,000, $2,400, and $415 respectively. In the City of Saint Paul, a review of accident records on seg- ments of Shepard Road, West 7th St., and Maryland Ave. for the 11-month period between January through November of 1972 is revealing. It shows that property damage only accidents cost about $520 per accident while injury causing accidents exclusive of medical, work -time lost, and other related costs, averaged about $850 per accident. From the data, it appears that the NSC figures are applicable to the City of Saint Paul. Despite occasional claims to the contrary, the rate of accidents per number of miles driven on freeways is better than on other types of roadways. The statistical data show that, nationally, fatality rates on urban interstates are about 2. 2 fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles driven compared with about 3. 8 for urban non -interstate roadways. In the State of Minnesota, the fatal crash rates for 1971 on urban interstates and urban streets were 0. 78 and 2. 58 fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles respectively In non -fatal accidents, the 1971 rates for urban interstates versus urban streets were 47. 9 and 212. 1 per 100 million vehicle miles (for accidents with personal injuries). There are no rates available for property - damage only accidents although NSC figures indicate generally that total damages in this category run about one-fourth those of the injury -causing ones. I - 77 The expected 1985 travel on the I-35E link approximates 80, 570, 000 vehicle miles per year. Applying the NSC figures and State of Minnesota accident rates for 1971, the safety benefits for the link would total about $71, 000 in fatalities, $317, 500 in injury -causing accidents, and about $63, 500 in property damage accidents per year. Discounting the totals by 30% as the share of travel which probably would not have taken place without a freeway the accident savings would still total over $300, 000 per year. The greatest savings in transportation are due to savings in time. Using the same 80, 570, 000 vehicle miles per year figure above and assuming average speeds of 45 miles per hour on I-35E and 25 miles per hour on city arterial streets, a direct time saving of over 1. 4 million vehicle hours per year is likely. Discounting for I-35E - generated traffic once again reduces the time savings to 1. 10 million vehicle hours. With a vehicle occupancy rate of 1. 4 and a value of $1. 80 per hour per person, each vehicle -hour saved can be valued at $2. 55 per hour. The $1. 80 figure is consistent with the tendency to associate the value of time with the minimum hourly wage. (However, it requires noting that the Stanford Research Institute data, which suggest an income -dependent time -saving factor, would result in values at least 50% higher.) Thus, a minimum annual savings in time of over $2, 800, 000 per year are quantifiable. The time -savings do not include any upward adjustments due to higher values of time for commercial trucking and distribution. I- 78 c. Investments in new facilities is an economic factor of importance. Accordingly, the purpose of the personal interview survey was to determine what level of investments the interviewees had considered on the basis of I-35E. As reference to Appendix 1 (Ques. Q6D-E) indicates, the total investment in the C. B. D. made on the basis of I-35E is $3, 000, 000. In fact, the majority (61%) of those interviewed responded that I-35E would not affect their invest- ment decisions. There is no way of determining whether the heavy investment already committed to the rebuilding of downtown Saint Paul included the element of access via I-35E in the decision -making process. Four firms situated in Saint Paul, but not in the downtown area, re- sponded that they had made investments totalling about $18 millions on the basis of I-35E although nearly $15 millions were for out -of -city locations. d. Mobility is another important item to consider. In general, facilities which provide mobility to a community are an asset. This is not to say "the more mobility the better" without reservations. However, it is to suggest that members of a mobile public have a greater number of opportunities and activities from which to avail themselves than would be the case in a setting where mobility is constrained. Similarly, it brings within reach larger expanses from which cultural, educational, commercial and other activities benefit. The denial of a "reasonable" array of mobility -providing facilities in the City would correspond to a loss of opportunities to Saint Paulites and the activities it provides. I - 79 In the case of Saint Paul, an item deserving of special consideration is the new Saint Paul Civic Center, an all-purpose facility which represents an outlay of about $28, 000, 000. It is important to the City's taxpayers because any operating deficits must be met by the property tax. It is not possible to estimate the magnitude of the effect of I-35E on the Center's operation. However, it is axiomatic that the larger the area from which the Center can draw, the better are its chances to succeed. It requires emphasizing at this point that the primary items discussed thus far relative to proposed I-35E and the quantifications given are economic ones. Please see Sections II and IV of this Report for discussions of the environmental and social factors involved and their estimated costs. I - 80 5. History of Project The text of the history of the project given below is one prepared by the Minnesota Department of Highways for inclusion in this Report. The Consultant's comments are identified separately. S. P. 6280 (T. H. 35E) From West 7th Street to T. H. 94 in St. Paul History of Project The corridor along Pleasant Avenue has been proposed as the location for an arterial street or highway since the early 1940's. On October 31, 1945 the St. Paul City Council adopted a resolution urging the construction of an Interstate freeway on that route. On December 13, 1956 the Minnesota Highway Department conducted a public hearing in the St. Paul City Council Chambers covering this project and on July 31, 1957 the City Council adopted a resolution approving the pre- liminary plans for the Interstate routes within the city. During the course of location and design studies, the project was reviewed with St. Paul engineers and planners, representatives of churches, hospitals and civic groups and individuals in an effort to produce an acceptable design. During the period from September 1964 through November 1971 the City Council voted a total of ten approvals of layouts and of construction plans for storm sewer tunnels, bridges, and roadway grading and surfacing for the project between West 7th Street and Interstate Highway 94. Development of this project has been closely coordinated with the Federal Highway Administration (formerly U.S. Bureau of Public Roads). Significant I - 81 Federal approvals include the specific location approval for the entire project on February 6, 1957. Authorization to proceed with detail design was given on August 11, 1961 for the portion from West 7th Street to Duke Street and on August 23, 1962 for the portion from Duke Street to Interstate Highway 94. In addition to the 1956 Public Hearing, Opportunity for a Public Hearing was offered on the project between West 7th Street and Duke Street from July 30 to August 30, 1970. One request was received which was later withdrawn in writing. An Opportunity for a Public Hearing was offered on the portion from Duke Street to Kellogg Boulevard from March llth to April 1st, 1971. No response was received to those publications. An Opportunity for a Public Hearing was offered on the portion from Walnut & Ninth Streets to the I-94 connectors between John Ireland Boulevard and 7th Street from August 2nd to August 23, 1971. Three requests were received which were withdrawn in writing after the project was discussed with those who made the request. This project was reviewed by the Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities area. Its concurrence in the portion of the project from 6th Street to loth Street was given on November 14, 1968. Approval of the entire project from West 7th Street to I-94 was given on February 19, 1969. Notification was made to the State Planning Agency on July 6, 1970 and their acknowledgement was received on October 20, 1970. The bulk of the right of way for this project was acquired before 1967. The residents were relocated and the properties were cleared. Construction I - 82 commenced in 1964 on a storm sewer tunnel from Grace and Bay Streets to James Avenue and in 1970 on another tunnel from Thompson and Pleasant to the Mississippi River. Grading and paving of street connections and bridges in the vicinity of Victoria Street commenced in 1966. Bridges and their roadway approaches were also built at St. Clair Avenue and at Randolph Avenue starting in 1967. Mainline grading construction for the portion from West 7th Street to Duke Street started in 1971. In April 1972 the City Council by resolution requested an in depth study of alternate routes for I-35E and stated its intent to take legal steps to rescind all previous approvals. On August 1, 1972, the City of St. Paul, four neighbor- hood associations and eight individuals commenced legal action in United States District Court to seek certain relief relating to the location, design and construction of the portion of I-35E from West 7th Street to I-94. As a part of the Stipulation of Settlement of this legal action approved on August 22, 1972, it was agreed that an Environmental Impact Statement would be prepared. Consultant Comments The proposed I-35E project is one with a long history. The State of Minnesota and the City of St. Paul have been actively involved with it in a major way since 1958. Much planning effort in both the public and private sector of the community based on the assumption that I-35E would be built has taken place. In addition to the preceding text, Table 1-15 gives a partial list of City of Saint Paul Council actions relative to I-35E specifi- cally. The inclusion of Table I-1 5 is not for the purpose of justifying the I-35E project per se, but for providing additional background information. I - 83 October 31, 1945 Table I-15 City of Saint Paul Council Actions Relative to Proposed I-35E Duke Street to I-94 Junction C. F. 134644, General approval of a major highway meeting the standards of the National System of Interstate Highways from the Capitol area to Lexington Ave. Bridge site. July 31, 1957 C. F. 183958, Approved preliminary plans for all inter- state routes in the city. November 10, 1969 C. F. 246334, Approval of layout Ramsey ramps to downtown. March 11, April 1 Opportunity for Design Public Hearing (Duke St. - 1971 Kellogg Blvd. ) June 7, 1971 C. F. 254328, Requested construction of frontage road (Sherman St. to Ninth St. ) August 2-9, 1971 Opportunity for design Public Hearing (Sherman St. to Ninth St. ) Duke Street to River October 31, 1945 C. F. 134644, General approval of a route from the Capitol area along Pleasant Ave. and crossing the river at Lexington Ave. extended to T. H. 13. July 31, 1957 C. F. 183958, Approved preliminary plans for all interstate routes in the city. June 20, 1969 C. F. 244537, Approved layout No. 10 for I-35E, W. Seventh to Duke St. June 24, 1969 C. F. 244618, Approved of Layout No. 10A for I-35E, W. Seventh St. to Duke St. August 1 & 6, 1971 Publication of opportunity for Design Public Hearing. May 28, 1971 C. F. 254219, Approval of construction plans and special provisions. November 11, 1971 C. F. 256327, Approval of grade change on Main Line between W. Seventh St. and Duke St. I - 84 6. Current Status of the Project A review of the status of work on the proposed I-35E link shows that 9 of the 15 highway bridges programmed have been constructed along with the one railroad bridge on the project. In addition, grading work is complete from West 7th St. to Saint Clair Ave. (75% of the total length). Also, slope stability structures in the vicinity of St. Clair Ave. and Kellogg Blvd. are inplace. Plate A at the beginning of this Report gives an aerial view of the work completed as of April, 1973. The costs on the link to date have totalled $23, 600, 000 in actual dollars with a probable 1972 dollar valuation in excess of $25 millions. The amount includes costs for design, right-of-way, construction, and miscellaneous items which date back to 1958. For all practical purposes, work on proposed I-35E has been at a stand- still since the fall of 1972. Only construction work that had been contracted for prior to the August 22, 1972 dated Stipulation of Settlement Agreement has been completed. In its present incomplete form, proposed I-35E has led to local problems in some instances. Perhaps the most objectionable problems are those that have emerged in the South Lexington Parkway area. Specifically, residents along the Parkway have been complaining about the difficulties in entering and exiting from their driveways because of the unusually heavy traffic on I - 85 it. Similarly, streets already severed by I-35E but as yet not connected to other streets and/or frontage roads present an "unfinished" situation which is not satisfactory. (In large measure, the reason for the "unusually heavy" traffic conditions along South Lexington Parkway is that it is now carrying traffic which would have been on I-35E if it had been available for use. ) In any event, the majority of the residents in the South Lexington Area apparently consider the status quo unacceptable . Thus, in this connection, over 500 residents (517) have petitioned the City of Saint Paul to have the project completed. The petition is on file at the City of Saint Paul Clerk's office. In addition to the problem associated with the physical elements of proposed I-35E, there are the pervasive effects of "indecision". At this point, it is difficult for planning efforts to proceed with any degree of confi- dence as to what will happen to the I-35E project. The I-35E project represents a primary transportation link in the system proposed for the Saint Paul - Minneapolis metropolitan area. The effects of a "build" or a "don't build" decision in the present corridor will be of major magnitude. I - 86 SECTION II PROBABLE EFFECTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT SECTION II - PROBABLE EFFECTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES SECTION SUMMARY AND COMMENTS A. SUMMARY B. COMMENTS II -a II-b II. PROBABLE EFFECTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT II-1 - II-65 A. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS II-1 1. Noise Pollution II-2 2. Air Quality II-20 3. Vibration II-31 4. Slope Stability on the Bluff Area II- 33 5. Effects on Area Vegetation II-39 6. Aesthetics II-40 7. Water Pollution II-42 B. SOCIO-ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS 1. Neighborhood Disruption 2. Displacement of Families and Businesses 3. Loss in Property Values (Or Gains) 4. Effects on Historic Sites 5. Effects on Hospitals 6. Effects on Parks and Playgrounds 7. Effects on Churches 8. Effects on Schools II-45 II-45 II- 50 II- 52 II- 55 I1- 59 II-60 II-61 II-62 C. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR SUMMARY II-64 II - a SECTION II - PROBABLE EFFECTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT LIST OF TABLES TABLE II - 1 FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION (FHWA) DESIGN NOISE GUIDELINES II - 2 NOISE EFFECTS ALONG I-35E LINK WEST 7TH STREET TO I-94 JUNCTION II - 3 EFFECTIVENESS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSION CONTROL PROGRAM II - 4 EMISSION FACTORS FOR VEHICLES USING FREEWAYS (ARB) - 5% HDV MIX II - 5 EMISSION FACTORS FOR VEHICLES USING CITY STREETS (EPA) - 5% HDV MIX II - 6 1972 AIR QUALITY MEASUREMENTS FOR CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBONS AND NITROGEN OXIDES, SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA II - 7 ESTIMATED CARBON MONOXIDE (CO) EMISSIONS CAUSED BY TRAVEL ON PROPOSED I-35E II - 8 ANALYSIS OF FLOW, SALT APPLIED AND SALT DISCHARGED, JOHN F. KENNEDY EXPRESSWAY, FEBRUARY 23 TO APRIL 6, 1967 II - 9 PROPOSED I-35E PROJECT AREA ENVIRONMENTAL SCORE SHEET PAGE II - 3 II - 16 II - 21 II - 24 II - 25 II - 27 II - 29 II - 43 II - 65 II - b SECTION II - PROBABLE EFFECTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE PAGE Fig. 26 Fig. 27 Fig. 28 Fig. 29 Fig. 30 Fig. 31 Fig. 32 Fig. 33 Fig. 34 a. Limits of Audibility b. Continuous Ambient Noise Levels by Land Use c. Average Highway Noise Levels by Vehicle Type d. Median Highway Noise Level Estimates a. Sources of Truck Noise b. Passenger Car Noise at 50 ft. c. Motorcycle and Sports Car Noise Noise Level Dissipation from 6-lane Highway Noise Level Dissipation from 8-lane Highway 70 Decibel Noise Limits in Project Area Carbon Monoxide, Hydrocarbon, and Nitrogen Oxide Emissions from Vehicles Minneapolis -St. Paul Area Wind Roses Pleasant Ave. Test Cut Location Three Problem Areas Studied for Soil Stability II - 5 II - 5 II - 6 II - 6 II - 9 II - 10 II - 10 II - 11 II - 12 II - 15 II - 23 II - 30 II - 35 II - 36 II - c 1 1 SECTION II - PROBABLE EFFECTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT SECTION SUMMARY AND COMMENTS A. SUMMARY SECTION II provides details on 7 physical and 8 socio-economic environmental factors selected by the Consultant as the most representative factors requiring consideration along the proposed I-35E link. The physical factors are 1) Noise Pollution, 2) Air Quality, 3) Vibration, 4) Slope Stability on the Bluff Area, 5) Effects on Area Vegetation, 6) Aesthetics, and 7) Water Pollution. The Socio-economic factors considered are 1) Neighborhood Disruption, 2) Displacement of Families and Businesses, 3) Loss in Property Values (or Gains), 4) Effects on Historic Sites, 5) Effects on Hospitals, 6) Effects on Parks and Playgrounds, 7) Effects on Churches, and 8) Effects on Schools. In the physical factor category, the most critical element is noise. The predicted noise levels along proposed I-35E indicate that 188 dwellings will face noise levels at or above the desirable limit of 70 dBA set by the Federal Highway Administration for L10 (See Table II-1 for details). In terms of length, there is a need to seek exceptions to the noise standards on about 40% of the entire length of the proposed link if I-35E is to be constructed in the Pleasant Ave. corridor. II - d Air quality along the corridor will decline with pollutant levels increasing over present levels. However, the overall effect of I-35E should result in a decline in carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon emissions for the City as a whole. From 1985 on, proposed I-35E traffic should add no more than 2 parts per million to the air along the link. Vibration is a problem that affects the Grand Ave. -Ramsey St. to Kellogg Blvd. segment more so than any other. This is because of the presence of hospitals and extended care facilities in the segment as well as the nearness of the "bluff" area to the left of the roadway. Its magnitude has yet to be determined. Slope stability on the bluff area affects 3 locations (see fig. 34 ) and is an engineering problem which the Minnesota Department of Highways and its Consultants, Shannon and Wilson, Inc. of Seattle, Washington have evaluated. With the exception of the area near the Chancery wall in the vicinity of Kellogg Blvd., remedial actions are complete. Area vegetation along the proposed I-35E link from West 7th St. to the Capitol Approach Complex concentrate on the stretch from St. Clair Ave. northerly. The indications are that the freeway should not represent a source of significant harm to the vegetation. Aesthetics relates most prominently to the appearance of noise abatement structures that would be necessary to meet Federal Highway Administration design requirements. It is probable that considerable number of persons would find such structures aesthetically displeasing. Water pollution from proposed I-35E should prove to be negligible. This is because the Minnesota Department of Highways has progressively reduced its use of salt for snow removal purposes. The available data suggest that the effects on water pollution in Twin City waters, notably the Mississippi River, should be negligible. In the socio-economic factor category, it would appear that the most important (in the Consultant's opinion) factor is neighborhood disruption. In this connection, neighborhood disruption refers to two conditions. The first is the condition at the southerly end of the link where proposed I-35E does divide a neighborhood. Because construction work since the late 1960s has resulted in a divided neighborhood condition for about 6 years, the southerly end has probably undergone adjustments already. The second is the condition where high -income families residing on the "bluff" would leave the area and possibly the City. The extent of how much the high -income exodus would occur (if it occurred), is impossible to estimate. Displacement of families and businesses, which would normally rank high, is not a serious consideration in the case of this project. This is so because all families but 7, and all affected businesses have already relocated. (Actual construction work on the project has been ongoing since the mid- 1960s.) The seven residences (near St. Clair Ave. ) would have a high noise exposure if II - f I-35E is constructed That there is a loss in property values of residential properties situated immediately adjacent to freeways is reasonably well -documented. The available data suggest that losses in the relative value of such homes range between 8% and 15%. A prominent St. Paul Realtor indicated to the Consultants that the loss factor could even be 30% or more on high-priced homes where amenity factors affect prices significantly. The Consultants have used 10% and 25% loss factors respectively for homes in the "flats" and "bluff" areas respectively. In this context, the loss factor reflects a slower rate of increase in home values adjacent to freeways when compared to similar homes farther away. In contrast, property value gains generally occur in the case of apartments and commercial properties because of the importance of accessibility to them. Historic sites are a major consideration in connection with proposed I-35E construction. Designation of a significant part of the "bluff" area as a historic hill district by the State of Minnesota Legislature in 1973 places I-35E right- of-way nearly adjacent to it in parts. This is particularly true in the Grand Ave. - Ramsey St. to Kellogg Blvd. segment (Seg. 6) of the proposed roadway. The "hill" district includes 2 buildings, the James J. Hill and the Burbank - Livingston -Griggs houses, listed in the National Register of Historic Places. In addition, there are other buildings near proposed I-35E in Segment 6 II - g 1 1 1 1 which may be nominated for inclusion in the National Register. One of these structures is a Cass Gilbert -designed church which the Consultants hope can be preserved. Hospitals in the Grand Ave. - Ramsey St. to Kellogg Blvd. segment (Seg. 6) present a mixed situation. On the one hand, there are the factors of vibration, noise and air pollution. On the other hand, there is the factor that a high-speed roadway serves to place the affected "inner-city" hospitals within reach of larger segments of the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. Parks and Playgrounds should not be significantly affected by proposed I-35E. The indications are that freeways do not harm playground activities and "active" parks. In the case of "passive activity" parks, the indications are that the effects of proposed I-35E would be minimal. There do not appear to be any Section 4(f) lands involved. Churches , with general reliance on the community around them for support and vitality, are affected directly by what happens to their congregations. In effect, the well-being of the churches in the area relates in large measure to the socio-economic health of the community. Unless there is a wholesale exodus of middle -and -high -income families from the Summit community, the churches should be able to hold their own. Schools along proposed I-35E should not be adversely affected by it in a significant manner. This is essentially so because the St. Paul Schools have assumed that I-35E would be constructed in the Pleasant Ave. corridor and II - h have planned accordingly. In sum, when one looks at the combined effects of all the factors con- sidered, the stretch of proposed I-35E from St. Clair Ave. to Kellogg Blvd. represents the most seriously affected portion. This stretch covers slightly more than one-third of the entire length of the link from West 7th St. to the Capitol Approach Complex. B. COMMENTS By size and magnitude alone, an urban freeway such as proposed I-35E significantly affects the physical and socio-economic environment of the City through which it traverses. To be sure, some of the effects are favorable, others undesirable. Of the two types of effects, the socio-economic effects are unquestionably the most difficult to determine. There is no known way that the Consultant is aware of by which it is possible to avoid undesirable effects completely. SECTION II - PROBABLE EFFECTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT It is essential to state at the very outset of this Section that, given the need for reasonable economic constraints, it is a virtual impossibility to construct a project of freeway magnitude without causing harm in some manner to an established cityscape. Obviously, the environmental effects in such a case are both physical and socio-economic. It is similarly essential to state at the very outset of this Section that the physical and socio-economic effects of a project of freeway magnitude on an established cityscape are not necessarily all negative ones. In order to isolate the areas most affected by environmental factors, physical and socio-economic, the evaluation of each element is by segments as given in Table I- 1 earlier. A. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS With respect to I-35E, the estimated order of the physical environmental factors concerning the residents in the proposed project area are as follows: 1) Noise Pollution 2) Air Quality 3) Vibration 4) Slope Stability on the Bluff Area 5) Effects on Area Vegetation 6) Aesthetics 7) Water Pollution (The order given is a subjective one based on the judgment of the Consultants. ) 1. Noise Pollution Noise affects people medically, psychologically, and socially. Medically, the most extreme and widely recognized effect of noise is loss of hearing. Psychologically, it is an annoyance which can produce headaches, insomnia, and nervousness. Socially, noise levels in urban communities, which have been on an almost continuous rise, are leading to greater levels of discomfort. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has set design guidelines on permissible noise levels from highway sources by land use. The require- ments, which became effective in 1973, appear in Table II-1. Reference to the table indicates that the land uses along the proposed I-35E link described in Section I of this Statement generally fall into the "Category B" group. As a result, the FHWA requirements are that noise levels from highway sources not exceed 70 dBA at the exterior of the Category B facilities more than 10% of the time. (Note: The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency has been considering a limit of 65 dBA for facilities such as hospitals and "quiet" residential neighborhoods since mid-1973. There are no current means of predicting how the resolution of the 5 dBA difference, which is very consider- able, will come about. ) In order to establish a relationship between ambient noise levels by land use and noise originating from highway sources, it is helpful to refer to figs. 26 and 27. Fig. 26 divides into 4 parts - 26a, 26b, 26c and 26d - and fig. 27 divides into 3 parts - 27a, 27b, and 27c. II - 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Permissible L10 Readings in Decibels (A -Scale) Table II-1 Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Design Noise Guidelines February 1973 Land Use Category 60 dBA (exterior) 70 dBA (exterior) 75 dBA (exterior) 55 dBA (interior) Notes: L 10 is the the period magnitude A - Tracts of land where serenity and quiet are of extraordinary significance, and serve an important public need, and where the preservation of those qualities is essential if the area is to serve its intended purpose. B - Residences, motels, hotels, public meeting rooms, schools, churches, libraries, hospitals, auditoriums, picnic areas, recreation areas, play- grounds, active sports areas, and parks. C - Developed lands, properties, and categories not included in A or B above. D - Undeveloped lands. This category requires individual evaluation. E - Residences, motels, hotels, public meeting rooms, schools, churches, libraries, hospitals, auditoriums where exterior limits in Category B are exceeded because of non -compatible land uses. sound level exceeded 10% of the time. (loth percentile for under consideration. ) This value is an indicator of both and frequency of occurrence of the loudest noise event. L50 is the sound level exceeded 50% of the time. dBA - a weighted unit in which the levels of various acoustical quantities are expressed. Typical quantities so expressed are sound pressure level, noise level, and sound power level. The A -weighted sound level measures approximately the relative "noisiness" or "annoyance" of many common sounds on a standard sound level meter switched to the A -weighting (1000Hz). II - 3 Fig. 26a is a graphic representation of how intensity, frequency, and the hearing function relate. Intensity, or the change in pressure, refers to the sound energy flowing through a unit area. The frequency is in vibrations per second, or Hertz (Hz). A common measure of intensity is decibels (dB). The most important feature of fig. 26a is that it illustrates the logarithmic scale of the decibel scale. In other words, a change of 10 decibels, say from 60 dB to 70 dB, involves an increase in sound energy intensity of 10 times. Similarly, a 70 dB to 90 dB change involves an increase in sound energy intensity of 100 times. Fig. 26b depicts typical continuous ambient noise levels that one can expect to find in the land use types shown. In addition, figs. 26c and 26d give the average highway noise levels at 50 ft. based on vehicle types and at 100 ft. based on truck - automobile mixes respectively. The latter 2 figures point out that truck traffic is the primary factor in highway noise. For example, at a speed of 50 mph, a vehicle mix of 10% trucks and 90% automobiles results in noise levels of about 10 decibels higher than is the case without any trucks in the traffic stream. Similarly, fig. 27 shows the noise sources on the vehicles themselves. Specifically, fig. 27a indicates that retread tires on trucks can result in noise levels higher than those originating from the truck engines. On the other hand, fig. 27b demonstrates that, except during acceleration, passenger cars are not the primary highway noise source. An indication of this is that at II - 4 t LIMITS OF AUDIBILITY 1 10-4 120 10-6 100 10"12 10-14 Intensity level, decibels 80 60 40 20 10-16 0 __ i — I `mil Threshold of feeling I \ \ \ I I 1 \ \ \ r h'es // 50% of oUaii/y �� / 1% i 1000 Frequency Figure 26a. Limits of Audibility (Source: Weber, et. al., College Physics) 10,000 TYPICAL CONTINUOUS BACKGROUND NOISE LEVELS A -Weighted Sound Level in dBA 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 200 20 2 0.2 0.02 0.002 Pressure, dynes/cm2 0.0002 "DOWNTOWN" COMMERCIAL AREAS WITH HEAVY TRAFFIC INDUSTRIAL AREAS COMMERCIAL AREAS LIGHT TRAFFIC URBAN RESIDENTIAL AREA (DAYTIME) QUIET SUBURBAN AREA (NIGHTTIME) Figure 26b. Continuous Ambient Noise Levels by Land Use (Source: NCHRP Report No. 117) II-5 CUMULATIVE DISTRIBUTION OF HIGHWAY VEHICLES VERSUS NOISE LEVEL PERCENT OF VEHICLES MEDIAN SOUND LEVEL dB(A) AT 100 FT. 100 80 AUTOMOBILES 60 40 20 DIESEL TRUCKS GASOLINE POWERED TRUCKS 0 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 SOUND LEVEL d8(A) MEASURED 50 FEET FROM EDGE OF ROAD Figure 26c. Average Highway Noise Levels by Vehicle Type (Source: Transportation Noise and Its Control (DOT P5630.I)) 80 70 60 50 40 1 MEDIAN NOISE LEVEL ESTIMATES OF MIXED TRAFFIC at 50 MPH 5 % TRUCKS . / 10 % - 20 % TRUCKS TRUCKS•//�� \ /•'' 21/2%TRUCKS /.o%TRucKs I I I I 1 ill I 1 1 1 I 10 100 1000 DENSITY IN VEHICLES PER MILE OF ROADWAY Figure 26d. Median Highway Noise Level Estimates (Source: Transportation Noise and Its Control (DOT P5630.I)) II-6 1 1 t 60 miles per hour and at a distance of 50 ft., noise from a passenger car is about 72 dBA while truck noises range from about 82 dBA to 92 dBA. Motor- cycle and sports car noises generally fall in between the passenger car and truck noise levels (see fig. 27c). It is apparent from the data in figs. 26 and 27 that highways with both automobiles and trucks on it generate noise levels at off -highway locations in excess of the 70 dBA limits the FHWA has set as its design guidelines for Category B land uses (see Table II-1). To attack the excessive noise problem, the Federal Government, the States, individual cities, etc. are currently active in setting stringent noise limits on the loudest noise source, namely the trucks. For example, the FHWA's Motor Carrier Safety Bureau has already set limits of 90 dBA (in the cab) for motor carriers engaged in interstate commerce and does not rule out the possibility of lowering the limit in the future. Similarly, the State of Minnesota has passed legislations calling for maximum noise levels of 86 dBA (limit now is 88 dBA) for any vehicle of 6, 000 lb. gross weight or more manufactured on or after January 1, 1975. (Note: The State of California and the City of Chicago are committed to imposing a 75 dBA for such vehicles by 1980. ) In the absence of "quiet" vehicles until vehicle and tire modifications become a reality, the primary alternatives available to highway planners for reducing highway noises are to use the surrounding topography to attenuate t II - 7 highway noise, and 2) to construct noise abatement structures, or walls. Figs. 28 and 29 depict estimates of highway noise at various distances from the outermost traffic lane edges for 1) with and without noise abatement measures and for 2) at -level and loft -depressed roadways. Fig. 28 gives the expected L10 readings for a 6-lane highway with 8, 000 vehicles per hour, of which 5% are trucks, and a travel speed of 53 miles per hour. Fig. 29 does the same for an 8-lane highway where the corresponding figures are 11, 000, 5%, and 53 mph. The data are from NOISE STANDARDS FOR FEDERAL HIGHWAYS, a paper presented by Harter M. Rupert at the Highway Research Board's Fifth Summer Meeting in August, 1972. To be sure, the noise levels given in figs. 28 and 29 are generalizations and are not for use in design. The current method used for forecasting ex- pected noise levels for design purposes is that outlined in the National Co- operative Highway Research Program (NCHRP), 117 titled HIGHWAY NOISE, A Design Guide for Highway Engineers, 1971. The noise prediction model introduced in NCHRP 117 is one developed by the firm of Bolt, Beranek and Newman (BBN) of Los Angeles, California. Since its introduction, the model has undergone minor modifications as a result of field test data. The Minnesota Department of Highways uses a modified version of the model which has provided satisfactory results. In addition, the Consultant contacted W. G. Galloway of BBN who stated that according to the reports that they had received, there were no serious II - 8 Eli MEI — M — — r — — r I IMP — S Ilia OM NI S 1 Ili b to RELATIVE LEVEL OF ENGINE NOISE COMPARED TO LEVELS OF VARIOUS TYPES OF TIRES SOUND LEVEL dBA 90 B0 70 60 20 NOISE WITH RETREADS TYPICAL TOTAL 30 40 50 p0 / 60 POCKET RETREAD I CROSS BAR-D RIB-B riolo SPEED MPH DATA FOR SINGLE AXLE TRUCK AT 50 FT. FROM CENTERLINE OF VEHICLE TRAVEL LOAD TIRES BRAKES TRUCK NOISE SOURCES ANCILLARY EOUIPMENT TRANSMISSION EXHAUST ENGINE Figure 27a. Sources of Truck Noise (Source: Transportation Noise and Its Control, U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT P5630.I), June, 1972) Figure 27b. Passenger Car Noise at 50 ft. SOUND LEVEL AT 50 FT. dB(A) MOTORCYCLE AND SPORTS CAR NOISE AT 50 FEET dB(A) 100 - 90 80 70 60 7- ACCELERATING MOTORCYCLE SPORTS - CAR STEADY SPEED 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 SPEED MPH Figure 27c. Motorcycle and Sports Car Noise Source: Transportation Noise and Its Control, U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT P5630.I), June,I972 II-10 1111 M— r r MI it -- — I• r— M 111181 b HIGHWAY NOISE (dBA, LLo) AT VARIOUS DISTANCES FROM EDGE OF 6-LANE HIGHWAY TRAFFIC: 8,000 VEHICLES PER HOUR, 5% TRUCKS, 53 MPH 100 125 200 300 400 RIGHT OF WAY LINE NO BARRIER • 78 77 74 71 69 LANDSCAPING 7• 3 72 69 66 64 100' • • • 67 66 64 61 58 NOISE l 6' BARRIER ABATEMENT \ ' MEASURES • • 63 62 60 56 54 12' BARRIER • 73 72 10' DEPRESSED 69 64 61 Figure 28. Noise Level Dissipation from 6-Lane Highway (Source: Rupert, H. M., Noise Standards for Federal Highways, 1972) HIGHWAY NOISE (dBA, L10) AT VARIOUS DISTANCES FROM EDGE OF 8-LANE HIGHWAY TRAFFIC: 11,000 VEHICLES PER HOUR, 5% TRUCKS, 53 MPH FT FROM 0 HWY NOISE ABATEMENT MEASURES 100 125 200 300 400 A RIGHT OF WAY LINE NO BARRIER 80 79 75 72 70 • • • • LANDSCAPING 7• 5 74 70 67 65 100' 6 BARRIER • • • 70 69 66 63 61 • _65 65 64 61 55 12' BARRIER • 75 74 68 65 62 10' DEPRESSED Figure 29. Noise Level Dissipation from 8—Lane Highway (Source: Rupert, H. M., Noise Standards for Federal Highways, 1972) complaints about the model's performance. While it is unlikely that any model can predict every possible condition exactly, the one in use has gained general acceptance nationally. Fig. 30 is an aerial photograph of the proposed I-35E project area with the estimated location of the 70 dBA limits for 2 conditions - with noise abatement structures and without noise abatement structures. Together with the data in Table II-2, it is possible to construct a "noise effect" profile along the proposed I-35E link. The model used for estimating the location of the 70 dBA limits is the Modified version of the NCHRP 117 method. Using project layouts (1 in. = 50 ft. scale) with the 70 dBA limits drawn on them by MHD personnel, the Consultant determined the number of dwellings and/or other buildings affected by noise within the specific segment. In counting the dwellings, there was an attempt to include those that were near the 70 dBA limits (shielded or non -shielded, whichever applied). The results appear in Table II-2 where the number of "border -line" dwellings are in the remarks column. With reference to shielding, the most common method of noise abatement consists of walls that generally range between 15 ft. and 25 ft. above roadway grades. The walls can be constructed out of wood, concrete (with facing material, if necessary), or other materials. The final designs for the noise abatement structures have yet to be established. Reference to fig. 30 and Table II-2 reveals that on the West -Seventh - Randolph Ave. , Randolph Ave. - Jefferson Ave. , and Jefferson Ave. - Victoria St. segments (Segments 1, 2, and 3), the dwellings near the highway right- of-way are either shieldable or few in number. The current proposals are for noise abatement structure along both sides of Segment 1 and no walls in Segments 2 and 3 where I-35E is elevated. In this connection, it is necessary to note that walls present an aesthetic problem. If not designed with aesthetics as a primary consideration and with landscaping, where possible, they could become eyesores. The indications are that the walls along Segment 1 will satisfy the 70 dBA noise level requirements at abutting properties. (Note: walls are effective in reducing highway noises by about 10 dBA to 15 dBA. ) In Segment 2, the existing topography (hillside), the in -part elevated form of the freeway, and the low -density development along the proposed I-35E right-of-way combine to make noise abatement structures ineffective and/or non -feasible. This results in a non -shielded length along the right side of Segment 2 of 0. 32 miles with a total of 16 dwellings (both sides) involved. Segment 3 is similar to Segment 2 in that it is bounded to the north by the Chicago -Milwaukee -Saint Paul and Pacific Ry., and by a sparse develop- ment to the south. Similarly, proposed I- 35E in this segment is elevated, thus negating the effectiveness of noise abatement structures. Nine dwellings on the south side of this 0.26-mile segment appear non-shieldable. II - 14 Figure 30. Location of 70 dBA Limits With and Without Noise Abatement Structures IT-|5 INN NMI INN N EN NE I MN NM MN NE H rn Segment West 7th St. Randolph Av. Randolph Av. Jefferson Av. Jefferson Av. Victoria St. Victoria St. St. Clair Av. St. Clair Av. Grand Av. - Ramsey St. Grand Av. - Ramsey St. Kellogg Blvd. Totals TABLE 11-2 NOISE EFFECTS ALONG I-35E LINK WEST 7th ST. TO 1-94 JUNCTION Dist. from Edge of Near Lane to 70 dBA Limits (No Barriers) ft. L 200 - 320 R 160 - 320 L 180 - 280 R 120- 260 L 220 - 300 R 300 - 320 L 210 - 370 R 160 - 300 L 260- 810 R 260 - 380 L 240 - 310 R 190 - 260 Dist. from Edge of Near Lane to 70 dBA Limits (With Barriers ) ft. 30 - 230 35 - 80 None None None None None None None 50 - 380 90 - 290 30 - 160 No. of No. of Dwellings Dwellings in Band Shielded No. of Dwellings Not Shielded Remarks 33 33 0 12 units on left 42 42 0 and 4 on right are at or near 70 dBA (Shielded) border. 4 0 4 Elevated Inter- 12 0 12 change Area. 0 9 0 34 53 65 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 Elevated Freeway 9 Section - Barriers Ineffective 0 Barriers Ineffective 34 Topography Difficult 53 55 24 9 15 Dwellings include 16 10 6 hospitals, institu- tions, residences, etc. 292 Notes. Distance from edge of near lane used to correlate to fig. 28. Segment from Kellogg Blvd. to 1-94 Junction alluded to in text. 104 188 In the Victoria St. - Kellogg Blvd. portion of the proposed I-35E link, the noise effect of the highway on the segments is more severe than those on Segments 1, 2, and 3. This is so because proposed I-35E traverses more populous areas and more noise -sensitive locations (i. e. hospitals, nursing homes, etc. ) in Segments 4, 5, and 6. Segment 4, Victoria St. - St. Clair Ave., is one in which proposed I-35E shifts from an elevated section to a depressed one. However, in this transition, the elevated and at -grade parts of the proposed roadway generate highway noises which subject 34 dwellings to 70 dBA levels or greater. In addition, the "tight' right-of-way limits do not provide sufficient space where noise abatement structures, which at best would be of questionable value, could be constructed. The problem area in Segment 4 extends about 0. 40 miles on the south side only. (The north side runs along the C. M. St. Paul and Pacific Ry. ) St. Clair Ave. to Grand Ave. - Ramsey St., Segment 5, includes the beginning of the high -value "bluff" community to its left. The "bluff" homes are about 250-300 ft. away from the proposed I-35E main lanes. However, the sidehill between the 2 entities is of such steepness that to construct noise abatement structures would involve walls of unreasonable heights (up to 50 ft. ). On the "flats" side of proposed I-35E, the existing topography is generally at about the roadway grade or lower. Noise abatement structures along portions of the segment on the right side of I-35E are planned. The 70 dBA limit is either just barely satisfied or exceeded along this 0. 89-mile long segment. Reference to Table II-2 shows that 108 of the total 188 non -shielded dwellings in the link are in Segment 5. The buildings subject to 70 dBA or more include apartment buildings on the Grand Ave. hill, as well as the Jefferson School facilities. Without a doubt, the Grand Ave. - Ramsey St. to Kellogg Blvd. segment (Segment 6) is the most noise -sensitive portion of the proposed I-35E link. This is because Segment 6 includes 2 hospitals, 1 nursing home, 1 ambulatory care facility, and a chancery (Archdiocese of Saint Paul - Minneapolis) are within 300 ft. or less proximity of proposed I-35E. (The Lindsay School for the Physically Handicapped immediately adjacent to the St. Luke's Division of United Hospitals, Inc. is being abandoned by the City of Saint Paul Public School system. Thus it does not represent a major problem area any longer. See discussion about Lindsay School on page II - 62. In addition to the facilities mentioned, proposed I-35E right-of-way abuts the State of Minnesota designated (1973) historic hill district on the bluff side. It is at the hospital sites that the L10 and L50 (see Table II-1 for defini- tions) measures do not fully satisfy the needs of hospital environments. The FHWA guidelines implicitly accept noise levels in excess of 70 dBA for up to 10% of the time. In such periods, the facilities would be subject to noise levels of up to about 90 dBA (this level assumes a 2 dBA overage in truck noises. ) There are window units on the market where noise reductions in excess of 30 - 40 dBA are possible. Even so, this would subject patients to noise levels II - 18 of about 50 - 60 dBA during the daytime and not much less than 45 - 55 dBA at night. Allowances for background noises from heating or air conditioning equipment still result in conditions where patient discomfort is likely to occur at night. At this point, it is necessary to indicate that comments have been made by several parties regarding the fact that the hospitals (especially St. Luke's Hospital) knew that I-35E would be built and should have designed their new wing (constructed in the late 1960's) accordingly. Conversely, the hospital administration has stated that it would not have been possible to estimate the magnitude of the noise problem at the time of design for the new wing. It is not the intent here to place blame in any direction; rather it is to present the two prevalent positions in the hospital - freeway relationship. Appendix 6 includes a statement from United Hospitals Consultants regarding their concern about noise problems. At this point, it is necessary to emphasize again that it is not feasible to shield all nearby properties from noise levels in excess of 70 dBA. There are 188 dwellings and/or buildings which are subject to higher noise levels. Similarly, the length along the proposed I-35E link receiving 70 dBA or more represents about 40% (equivalent) of the 3. 66-mile total. Thus, exceptions to the noise level standards are required. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2. Air Quality The air pollution literature generally lists 6 basic pollutant groups. They are, in alphabetic order 1) carbon monoxide, 2) hydrocarbons, 3) nitrogen oxides, 4) particulates, 5) photochemical oxidants, and 6) sulphur oxide. Motor vehicles are major sources in three of these groups - carbon monoxide, hydro- carbons, and nitrogen oxides. Research Triangle Institute estimates are that motor vehicles account for about two-thirds of carbon monoxide totals; 50% of hydrocarbon totals; and one-third of the nitrogen oxides. In addition, motor vehicles are a major source of asbestos, lead -bearing particulates, and oxidants. The Clean Air Act of 1970 stipulated that permissible 1975 emissions of carbon monoxides (CO), hydrocarbons (HC), and nitrogen oxides (NQ), not exceed 10%, 10%, and 10% (effective 1976) of their 1970 rates respectively. Since then, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has granted a one-year extension to 1976 for the CO and HC emission requirements, but has applied interim standards for 1975. The thrust of the Clean Air Act is to improve the quality of life in urban areas by first arresting, and then reversing the degrada- tion of air quality. The Twin Cities Air quality control region is one of those singled out by the EPA as one where special restrictions on motor vehicles may be necessary if 1975 requirements are to be met. In this connection, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPCA) has prepared a report for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The data in the report show that the City of Saint Paul II - 20 C. B. D. will meet the 1975 standard of 9 parts per million concentration for CO, which is the pollutant of greatest impact at this time. Hydrocarbons are not an issue. Table II-3 is a reproduction of an MPCA table from the report showing expected City of Saint Paul C. B. D. CO concentrations for 1975, 1976, and 1977. As can be observed, the City of Minneapolis C. B. D. is the problem area in the region. TABLE II-3 EFFECTIVENESS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSION CONTROL PROGRAM IN MINNEAPOLIS AND ST. PAUL CBD'S CO Concentration (ppm) CBD Minneapolis Standard 1971 1975 1976 1977 9. 0 15.0 0% St. Paul 9.0 0% 10. 4 8. 9 7. 5 15. 5%(2) 0% 0% Standard is Met 0% 0% 0% Emissions Density (kg/mi2/12-hour) "Safe"(1) 1971 1975 1976 1977 Minneapolis 13797 22988 15976 13549 11515 0% 15.5%(2) 0%0 0% St. Paul 13797 10321 7350 6327 5490 0% 0% 0% 0% NOTES (1) The "Safe" Emissions density is that value below which the 9 ppm standard is met. (2) Percent reduction necessary from transportation control strategies to meet 9 ppm standard (or the "Safe" Emissions density). In this connection, the MPCA has recommended a 5-strategy program to improve air quality in the Twin Cities area. They are as follows: Strategy 1 - Construction of parking facilities in the CBD fringe to intercept incoming traffic before entering CBD. Strategy 2 - Shuttle bus system to serve fringe parking facilities, replaced in later years by completed people-mover/skyway system. Strategies 1 and 2 are interdependent. Strategy 3 - Expanded express bus system to CBD with park -&-ride or kiss -ride parking facilities. Strategy 4 - Completion of freeway I-35W North around CBD, which diverts a portion of the through -traffic. Strategy 5 - Traffic -responsive computerized traffic management system in CBD to improve traffic flow. Consultant Note: While the air quality of both the Minneapolis and St. Paul CBD's would benefit, the strategies are much more critical for Minneapolis's compliance with the required standards. The final report submitted by the MPCA entitled "Implementation Plan to Achieve Carbon Monoxide Ambient Air Quality Standards, May 1973" received approval from the Federal Environmental Protection Agency on October 15, 1973. Fig. 31 is from "Traffic Information Requirements for Estimates of Highway Impact On Air Quality, 1972", a State of California Air Quality manual. It illustrates that as average trip speeds increase, CO and HC emissions decline while NO emissions increase. The implication is that from the standpoint of CO, the most important pollutant at this time, increasing trip speed is beneficial. That the stop -and -go type of City driving is worse than freeway driving in terms of emission rates is also documentable. Tables II - 22 GRAMS / MILE 50 40 30 20 10 10 20 30 40 50 SPEED ( MPH ) CARBON MONOXIDE GRAMS / MILE 10 5 5 4 3 2 AVG. TRIP SPEED STEADY - STATE SPEED 60 70 10 20 30 40 50 SPEED (MPH ) 10 20 30 40 50 SPEED (MPH ) NITRIC OXIDE 60 HYDROCARBONS 70 60 70 Figure 31. Carbon Monoxide, Hydrocarbon, and Nitrogen Oxide Emissions from Vehicles (Source. California Air Quality Manual, April, 1972) II-23 1 1 t TABLE II-4 EMISSION FACTORS FOR VEHICLES USING FREEWAYS (ARB) - 5% HDV MIX Year Carbon Monoxide Hydrocarbons* (CO in grams per mile) (HC in grams per mile) 1972 46.29 6.98 1973 43.0 5.94 1974 40.25 5.06 1975 35.56 4. 11 1976 28.39 3.20 1977 23. 68 2. 64 1978 19.86 2.14 1979 16.37 1.81 1980 12.75 1.25 1981 10.81 1.12 1982 9.08 . 97 1983 7.84 . 90 1984 6.92 .84 1985 5.51 .73 1986-2000 4.76 . 73 Notes: 1. Data are based on average speed of 22. 6 miles per hour (ARB method) Both CO and HC emission factors are lower at higher speeds. 2. ARB refers to the California Air Resources Board, 1025 P Street, Sacramento, CA 95814. The ARB publishes a quarterly report titled "California Air Quality Data", which presents a summary of all data from the continuous air monitoring stations in California. 3. HDV is an abbreviation for heavy duty vehicles. Automotive Hydrocarbon emissions are pertinent to air quality analyses primarily because of their role in oxidant formation by photochemical reactions. The EPA has set an air quality standard for hydrocarbons, not for health purposes, but as extra insurance that the oxidant standards are met. 1 II - 24 Y ear 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986-2000 TABLE II-5 EMISSION FACTORS FOR VEHICLES USING CITY STREETS (EPA) - 5% HDV MIX Carbon Monoxide Hydrocarbons (CO in grams per mile) (HC in grams per mile) 64. 58 59. 41 55. 27 46. 08 37. 18 30. 82 25.20 20. 83 16. 57 14. 27 11.88 10. 42 9. 37 7. 07 7. 03 9.25 8. 17 7. 27 5. 98 4. 79 3. 94 2. 68 2.61 1.97 1.70 1.40 1.22 1. 10 0. 86 0. 85 Notes: 1. Data are based on average speed of 19.6 miles per hour over a 7. 5 mile long trip during peak hour travel. 2. EPA refers to the Federal Environmental Protection Agency. 3. HDV is an abbreviation for heavy duty vehicles. *Automotive Hydrocarbon emissions are pertinent to air quality analyses primarily because of their role in oxidant formation by photochemical reactions. The EPA has set an air quality standard for hydrocarbons, not for health purposes, but as extra insurance that the oxidant standards are met. II - 25 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II-4 and 1I-5 from "Motor Vehicle Emission Factors for Estimates of Highway Impact on Air Quality, 1972" attest to this fact. In the tables, freeway CO and HC emission rates are consistently lower than on City streets with com- parable vehicle mixes. While the emission rates in CO and HC are improved by freeway travel, there is no question that the greater concentration of vehicles in a corridor can cause greater levels of "localized" air pollution. In the I-35E case, this suggests that air quality along the West 7th St. - I-94 junction link is likely to show a decline in the first years of the proposed freeway's operations. Then as older motor vehicles depart from the transportation scene, the air quality should improve. In the C. B. D. area, I-35E, by providing expeditious travel around the C. B. D. periphery represents a plus factor. It requires noting at this point that the foregoing do not take into account the effects of temperature inversions in the area. In such times, it follows that all unnecessary travel should cease and that the freeway - city street comparisons are not meaningful. a. Ambient Air Quality An indication of ambient air quality in the Saint Paul C. B. D. appears in Table II-6, which gives readings for CO, HC, and NO levels in 1972. The location of the Saint Paul continuous air monitoring station is at 100 East loth St. where idling cars are the norm rather than the exception because of the presence of a police station nearby. As can be seen, CO levels are at 1 II - 26 TABLE II- 6 1972 AIR QUALITY MEASUREMENTS FOR CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBONS, AND NITROGEN OXIDES ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 24 - Hour Readings Carbon Monoxide Hydrocarbons Nitrogen Dioxide (CO) (HC) (NO2 by Bubbler) parts per million parts per million parts per million Month Mean Max. Mean Max. Mean Max. January 3.7 8.8 0.75 1.48 0.038 0.044 February 3.7 5.7 0.48 1.03 0.047 0.061 March 3.5 5.4 0.71 1.38 0.066 0.094 April 3.5 5.2 0.66 1.44 0.070 0.091 May 4.7 7.8 0.86 1.74 0.056 0.070 June 5.2 7.3 0.84 1.35 0.080 0. 178 July 4.9 7.2 0.91 1.42 0.055 0.084 August 3.3 5.7 1.04 2.43 0.062 0.093 September 4.2 6.8 0.66 1.19 0.057 0.094 October 4.2 6.4 0.62 1.23 0.056 0.068 November 3.7 5.5 0.57 1.18 0.040 0.069 December N. R. N. R. N. R. N. R. 0. 045 0.067 Year Mean 4. 1 (11 mo. ) 0.74 (11 mo.) 0.056 Year Median 3.8 (11 mo. ) 0.65 (11 mo. ) 0.052 N. R. = No Reading Monitoring Station is at 100 East loth Street. II - 27 or below 1975 requirements (9 ppm). Fig. 32 presents "wind roses" for Minneapolis -Saint Paul International and the Saint Paul Downtown airports. A wind rose indicates the prevalent directions of winds and their strengths. For example, reference to the Saint Paul Downtown airport "wind rose" shows that winds are less than 4 mph 9. 5% of the time and are from the NNW direction in the following strengths: 1. 5% with no cases of winds over 31 mph strength from that direction. The data in fig. 32 show that the prevalent winds in the area are generally along NW -SE and NE -SW axes at the Saint Paul Downtown airport. This suggests that the winds from the southeast and southwest towards the bluff would occur about 20% and 16% of the time respectively. b. Projected Air Quality (CO) The wind rose data have been used in estimating air pollution levels along the I-35E corridor due to the freeway alone. The estimated levels of CO given in Table II-7 are for along the roadway and for a point 500 ft. downwind. The basis for the estimated CO emissions from proposed I-35E by segment is the method used by the State of California. The most probable and worst probable meteorological conditions used in computations are based on data supplied by the Twin Cities National Weather Service Office. In order to keep the magnitude of pollution in perspective, the reader is directed to the State of Minnesota Air Quality Requirements for 1975 included in Appendix 9. II - 28 TABLE II - 7 Location W. Seventh St. - Randolph Ave. Randolph Ave. - Jefferson Ave. Jefferson Ave. - Victoria St. Victoria St. - St. Clair Ave. ESTIMATED CARBON MONOXIDE (CO) EMISSIONS CAUSED BY TRAVEL ON PROPOSED I-35E Average Daily Estimated Peak Hour Travel (vehicles per hour) 1985 Estimated Average Travel Speed in Peak Hour mph CO Rates for Most Probable Meteorological Conditions During Peak Traffic Hour in Parts Per Million (ppm) 1985 CO Rates for Worst Probable Meteorological Conditions During Peak Traffic Hour in Parts Per Million (ppm) 1985 Distance Downwind from Roadway in Feet Distance Downwind from Roadway in Feet 0 500 0 500 St. Clair Ave. - Grand Ave. -Ramsey St. Grand Ave. -Ramsey St. to Kellogg Boulevard I-35E - I-94 "Common Section" 6500 50 7300* 45 1 0. 5 1 0. 5 3 1 2 1 5300 45 1 0. 5 2 1 5300 45 1 0. 5 2 1 5300 45 1 0. 5 2 1 6000 40 1 0. 5 2 1 10, 500 30 2 1 3 1 *Includes Travel on both the Main Lanes and the Short Line Road. 111111 11111 VS NM UN I--- I MO i 11011-- NO N 11011 r--- N r NE a-- NM In— MI N MS Ile H 0,1 0 MPLS.—ST. PAUL INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT EXAMPLE At Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport From the northwest (NW) direction, the wind strength and the percentages of time they apply are as follows: Wind Speed Percentage of Time mph 4- 12 4.25% 13- 15 1.63% 16- 31 3.27% 32 - 47 0. 16% Total 9. 31 % Note: Calm air prevails 6. 27% of the total time. ,e 0 •O ys0 360 Ip N 0 0t _x Y �. O`/ o,. 06, I Otl .00 1 pt‘ ST. PAUL DOWNTOWN AIRPORT Source U. S. Weather Bureau Station Wold Chamberlain Field Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport Period. 1949-1954 Based on 43,824 Hourly Observations O O WIND ROSES MPLS.—ST. PAUL INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT AND ST. PAUL DOWNTOWN AIRPORT Figure 32. Minneapolis -St. Paul Area Wind Roses 1 1 3. Vibration The concern on the part of area residents regarding vibration is essentially an indirect one. It relates to the fact that the area hospitals are considered assets to the community and factors which affect the hospitals negatively affect the community likewise. In addition, there is growing evidence that vibration ranks among the top 3 irritants originating from highways. Vibration effects on I-35E are a direct function of the roadway grade and the existing elevations of the limestone bedrock formations underneath. The closer to one another the two are, the greater is the propogation of vibration to surrounding structures. Accordingly, because of their closeness to I-35E and its proposed grades in the segment which are either at or less than 10 ft. above the limestone formation, the hospital -nursing home -school -institution occupied area between Grand Ave. -Ramsey St. and Kellogg Blvd. is once again the most adversely affected. The St. Luke's hospital administration has indicated its concern about vibration and how it would affect delicate eye surgery performed in operating rooms in the new wing of the hospital. To this end, their Consultant's report discussing the problem appears in Appendix 6. While criteria for residual vibration are noted in Appendix 5 (see page 4 of Paul S. Veneklasen and Associates, Consultants in Acoustics, correspondence), they should not be considered absolute requirements. Logic dictates that if existing vibration levels in the hospital area are not likely to be exceeded by proposed designs, no problem should exist. In this connection, the Minnesota Highway Department has undertaken work which, although to date has been somewhat cursory, is cognizant of the vibration issue. Although further identification of the magnitude of the vibration problem remains necessary, the final design, construction, and maintenance procedures on this segment will be directed at minimizing the vibration problem. It is assumed that similar vibration concerns, albeit not to the same extent, are present in Children's Hospital as well.. Accordingly, it would appear that the hospitals, by quantifying existing vibration levels in critical areas, could facilitate the resolution of the vibration issue. Vibration in the other sections of the proposed I-35E link do not appear critical because of the general type of structures abutting the freeway, the grades, and the thickness of the glacial drift which overlays the limestone bedrock. II - 32 4. Slope Stability On The Bluff Area Construction work on portions of the proposed I-35E link has been ongoing in the form of bridge construction and/or clearing and/or grading since the mid- 1960's. In connection with construction efforts, a test cut along Pleasant Ave. was opened in 1969 to analyze soils along the "bluff" area. This cut revealed conditions similar to those at another location where the Minnesota Highway Department had noted lateral movements. Pursuant to this finding, the MHD engaged Consultants (Shannon and Wilson, Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineers of Seattle, Washington) to study and recommend remedial measures, if necessary, to insure the stability of the hillside. Subsequently, problem areas were identified by Consultants (Howard, Needles, Tammen and Bergendoff) for the final design of I-35E from Duke St. north to the I-94 junction. Again, Shannon and Wilson (S&W) were asked to investigate the problem sites, which were at the Oakland Wall, in the vicinity of the Children's Hospital and at the Chancery of the Archdiocese of Saint Paul near Kellogg Blvd. Figs. 33 and 34 are reproductions from Shannon and Wilson reports of 1970 denoting the Pleasant Ave. test cut location and the 3 problem areas indentified by the design consultants respectively. The field and laboratory investigations conducted by S&W revealed a need for remedial work to provide satisfactory slope stability. To this end, rec- ommendations were made which encompassed the drilling of large -diameter (5 ft.) cylinder piles spaced at 10 ft. on center into the relatively fault -free and stable Platteville limestone formation below. This recommendation, since 1I - 33 implemented, was for the area near the Pleasant Ave. test cut area (fig. 33). A retaining wall and a drainage system to lower ground water levels also were part of the recommended remedial scheme. (The drainage system is currently inplace. ) At the other 3 sites, the Consultants judged and MHD concurred that 1) the Oakland Hill (fig. 34) site would exhibit adequate factors of safety without special treatment, 2) the Children's Hospital site did not require remedial work; and 3) the Chancery area was not satisfactorily stable. Accordingly, S&W recommended that a concrete retaining wall on the freeway side of the frontage road, which was already a part of the proposed project, be modified to stabilize the hill. The recommendations that were presented, accepted, and since partially implemented involve the use of steel tie -backs into the side -hill. The scheme is to connect the tie -backs to soldier piles drilled into the Platteville limestone layer referred to earlier. It is fair to note, however, that the S&W recommendations and con- clusions for the Chancery area were on the basis of an MHD policy decision of 1970 stating in part: we have considered the degree of risk involved and are willing to accept the present marginal hillside and crib wall stability in the Chancery area with no attempt to improve upon it." The marginal stability referred to is indicative of the delicate stability of the Chancery area. The estimated approximate existing factors of safety range between 0. 92 and 1. 52 while the "after I-35E construction" factors of II - 34 0 C CROCUS abruantousl PLACE �1 A04,tc: \ =s el ,. .. _ SW y, APPROX. ` .w NPo AREA EXCAVATED 1969 ar-NN: nit i� bl !��:::.�. L, NOTE Base mop complied by Kneesoto Npf*ay Department VICINITY MAP MEDIUM �f ( 1R f O^ �I�� Y /_ f. l 4 _ .� o :Aug �,e.. �j�i Igo 200 SCALE IN FEET MINNESOTA HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT SITE PLAN PLEASANT AVE, TEST•CUT JANUARY 5, 19T0 W-1590 SNANNON N *IL SON Figure 33 Pleasant Ave. Test Cut Location for Soil Investigation (Source: Report to MHD by Shannon and Wilson, Consulting Engineers) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Not to scale ST. PAUL , MINNESOTA MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS VICINITY MAP SEPTEMBER 4,1970 W-2006-01 SHANNON a WILSON SOIL MECHANICS 9 FOUNDATION ENGINEERS Figure 34. Three Problem Areas Studied for Soil Stability (Source, Report to MHD by Shannon and Wilson, Consulting Engineers) a -36 safety are in the 0. 96 - 1. 77 range. In the meantime, the MHD initiated a monitoring program by placing slope indicators to measure movement in the areas where problems had been encountered. Readings have been taken regularly since and the stability of the slope watched closely. In August of 1972, earth movements were noted in the vicinity of the Pleasant Ave. test cut location to the bluff side of stations 412 to 415 (see fig. 33). Construction work was continuing in connection with grading for proposed I-35E at the time. Because of the presence of 7 homes fronting on Pleasant Ave. , MHD instructed the Contractor to place a temporary earth fill against the slide area. S&W have re -investigated the area and state the following in their Supplemental Report, Pleasant Avenue Test Cut Area, Saint Paul, Minnesota. A. Slide Area. In our opinion, the recent slide activity, as shown in Fig. 1, resulted from a complex combination of factors: steep slope, weak bentonite seam, blasting, excavation for rock anchors over too great a length and, to some minor extent, groundwater. Based on data from periodic field observations by the State, we have concluded that the slide has been effectively stabilized by the placement of the earth berm shown in Fig. 1. Thus, we believe there is no immediate danger to the residents of the homes located beyond the crest of the slope, even though the slide scarp cuts across portions of their property. Though the occurrence of this slide is unfortunate, it has provided a vivid example of how delicately balanced the area is. Since some doubt was expressed, at the time of our original investigation of the Pleasant Avenue Test Cut, regarding the need for the cylinder pile retaining wall (#415), this failure should fully justify the true need for the existing wall. In retrospect, it might have been prudent to have extended Wall 415 farther to the southwest, though in our opinion, it is unlikely that such an extension would have been approved at that time, because of the high cost and uncertainties regarding need." (Consultant Note: Fig. 1 referred to above is in S & W Report.) II - 37 In both the Chancery area and the Pleasant Ave. cut, a major factor in the slope stability problem is the presence of a thin bentonite seam along the top surface of the limestone formation (bentonite is a clay material). S&W have recommended the addition of a retaining wall anchored into the sidehill in a way similar to that recommended for the Chancery area. The work has not been done and awaits the outcome of this EIS. The purpose of this long treatment regarding the slope stability of the hillside is to indicate that it is a subject which has received considerable engineering attention to date. Except for the August 1972 slide which S&W attributes to the combination of factors identified in their Supplemental Report, the hill has been stable. II - 38 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5. Effects on Area Vegetation Between St. Clair Ave. and Kellogg Blvd. , a distance of about nine - tenths of a mile, stands of medium mixed timber generally dot the bluff -side of the proposed I-35E alignment. Their lower ends are between 40 ft. and 300 ft. from the nearest proposed I-35E pavement. In response to a request from the Consultants, the City of Saint Paul Parks Department conducted a brief survey of the trees in this area in March of 1973. Their findings were as follows: "The area between Kellogg Boulevard and Lawton Street consists of a mixed age hardwood stand. Species in the overstory are elm and boxelder with some ash, cottonwood, and a few maple. The overstory has an average size of 18"-20" with scattered 40" trees. The understory is sapling size ash and elm. The stands overall condition is good with the average amount of dead material from natural causes. The area between Lawton Street and St. Clair has a steeper slope and a heavier shade canopy resulting in less reproduction below existing trees. The reproduction in the understory is composed largely of ash. The overstory in this area is similar to the area between Kellogg and Lawton, but with a closer canopy. " It is not possible to determine the percentage of the timber that would be harmed by pollutants from traffic on proposed I-35E. However, it is un- likely that the stands between St. Clair Ave. and St. Albans St. would be seriously affected by I-35E. On the other hand, the stand between St. Albans St. and Goodrich Ave. would probably lose an indeterminate number of trees because of pollutants, salts, etc. from the highway. II - 39 6. Aesthetics The proposed sound abatement structures on the proposed I-35E link are the most likely sources of aesthetic debates and considerations. There is little doubt that they could indeed represent eyesores if not treated with taste. This is not to suggest that it is a simple matter to make a 20-ft. high wall, which is at best not a "natural" structure, look pleasant and acceptable. However, it is to suggest that landscaping and concerted effort to keep aesthetic values high on the priority list can ameliorate the appearances of such structures. In this connection, it requires emphasizing that if any freeway is to be considered as a part of a transportation plan in an urban setting, sound abate- ment structures are a necessity. The roadway area, itself, would have the usual elements of seeding, sodding and landscaping to minimize erosion and sedimentation. In the I-35E case, areas in the vicinity of Randolph Ave. and Jefferson Ave. , and near St. Clair Ave. lend themselves to special landscaping efforts. II - 40 7. Water Pollution The final destination of surface runoff from the proposed I-35E project is the Mississippi River. The runoff is conveyed to the river by storm sewer systems (surface) constructed for freeway drainage and/or deep tunnels located in the St. Peter sandstone formation underlying the Platteville forma- tion of limestone in most parts of the City of Saint Paul. The Federal Water Pollution Control. Administration (FWPCA) of the U.S. Department of the Interior recognizes that surface drainage from urban areas can be a significant, albeit sporadic, source of pollution in the receiving bodies of water. Data given in Water Pollution Aspects of Urban Runoff, an FWPCA publication (WP-20-15) dated January, 1969, indicate that all surface runoffs contain pollutants in the form of floating material, suspended or dissolved solids, and/or by bacterial contamination. Specifically, storm -water runoffs from freeways usually contain dust or dirt; road surfacing materials ravelled by travel, impact, frost action, or other causes; and chemicals used for the control of snow and ice. Of these, chemicals represent the primary consideration. In this connection, field investigations conducted on a section of the Kennedy Expressway in downtown Chicago during the winter of 1966-1967 is revealing. In a sharply defined drainage area of about 102 acres, samples of storm -water discharges were taken and analyzed. The period covered was from February 23 to April. 6, 1967. The Kennedy Expressway data appear in Table II - 8. II - 41 As Table II - 8 indicates, the average chloride concentrations during the test periods varied from 350 parts per million (ppm) up to about 25, 100 ppm. More specifically, the chloride concentrations for no snowfall (thus no salting) and for during snowfall periods averaged about 2, 000 ppm and 14, 000 ppm respectively. (The U.S. Public Health Service recommendations for maximum chloride content in public waters is 250 ppm. ) The high chloride concentrations noted in the previous paragraph do not mean that the chloride contents in a receiving water -body were that amount. Rather, they applied to the concentrations measured in the runoff waters them- selves. The expectation would be that the readings in a major water body would be much less. The data from a U.S. Geological Survey water quality monitoring station on the Mississippi River at St. Paul illustrate this point. Copies of print-outs regarding water quality at the St. Paul station for the dates of October 4 and November 22 in 1972 and January 3, February 7, and March 7 in 1973 are in Appendix 9. The data indicate that the maximum dissolved chloride concentra- tion reading was 14 milligrams per liter (equivalent to 14 ppm. ) and it occured on January 3, 1973. The chloride concentrations noted on the Mississippi River in St. Paul correlate to the 15-20 ppm readings found in tests conducted on the Mississippi River near Brainerd, Minnesota, and reported in Pollution Monitor of March, 1971. It is unlikely that I-35E will contribute to water pollution in the Twin City area in any significant way. It is possible to make this statement for two reasons. II - 42 1 1 1 1 TABLE II - 8 ANALYSIS OF FLOW, SALT APPLIED, AND SALT DISCHARGED JOHN F. KENNEDY EXPRESSWAY, FEBRUARY 23 to APRIL 6, 1967 Average Total Daily Chloride Solt Solt Salt Total Salt Date Flow Concentration Applied Applied Discharged Discharged (gal.) (ppm) (Ibs.) (Ibs.) (lbs.) (Ibs.) 2/23 28,080 24 30,660 25,100 16,100 16,100 10,400 10,400 25 41,040 6,900 - 3,840 14,240 26 45,800 6,900 - 4,280 18,520 27 59,850 6,900 5,600 24,120 28 55,600 3,400 - 2,560 26,680 3/ 1 42,800 2,700 1,570 28,250 2 33,050 3,000 1,340 29,590 3 44,640 1,900 - - 1,150 30,740 4 39,000 2,700 24,200 40,300 1,430 32;170 5 38,780 2,700 - - 1,430 33,600 6 37,200 4,250 - 2,140 35,740 7 22,600 4,350 1,330 37,070 8 20,700 4,100 - 1,150 38,220 9 31,310 3,250 - 1,380 39,600 10 57,660 2,100 - 1,640 41,240 11 76,200 2,040 2,110 43,350 12 43,400 2,040 1,200 44,550 13 69,160 2,040 1,920 46,470 14 44,100 2,398 - - 1,430 47,900 15 54,180 9,970 29,100 69,400 9,490 52,390 16 26,550 4,030 - - 1,450 53,840 17 27,800 4,870 - 1,830 55,670 18 17,400 4,920 - - 1,160 56,830 19 15,700 4,920 32,200 101,600 1,050 57,880 20 193,750 4,920 - - 12,900 70,780 21 105,300 1,800 2,570 73,350 22 44,640 2,750 1,660 75,010 23 44,640 1,420 850 75,860 24 77,800 2,300 2,430 78,290 25 44,640 2,660 1,600 79,890 26 46,000 2,170 - 1,350 81,240 27 159,500 2,300 4,970 86,210 28 41,000 2,300 1,280 87,490 29 25,400 2,435 840 88,330 30 25,000 2,485 840 89,170 31 186,200 2,085 5,250 94,420 4/ 1 1,001,550 350 4,700 99,120 2 171,900 350 - 810 99,930 3 380,500 350 1,800 101,730 4 45,000 1,795 1,100 102,830 5 46,000 1,995 1,240 104,070 6 41,000 1,995 1,110 105,180 Note: Table II-8 is a reprint from "Water Pollution Aspects of Urban Runoff , January, 1969, p• 98". The book is a publication (WP-20-15) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration (FWPCA), U.S. Department of the Interior. II - 43 The first reason is that the Minnesota State Legislature enacted legislation in 1971 directed at minimizing the harmful effects of salts and chemicals. The specific legislation is under the title, "SNOW REMOVAL: USE OF SALT OR CHEMICALS, RESTRICTED", Section 160. 215 (Chapter 622). Accordingly, the Minnesota Department of Highways has been active in reducing the use of rock salts and chemicals such as calcium chlorides on roadway surfaces. (Rock salt use by MHD in the Twin Cities Metropolitan area has declined pro- gressively from about 76, 300 tons in the winter of 1969-1970 to about 42, 000 tons in the winter of 1972-1973. ) The second reason is that data in Water Pollution Aspects of Urban Runoff suggest that storm -water runoff containing litter from City streets have greater amounts of pollutants than are likely to be found in storm runoff from freeways. (This is because storm -water runoff containing litter includes debris from vacant lands and yards, animal droppings, household refuse dropped during collection, sidewalk sweepings, etc. ) TT - 44 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 B. SOCIO-ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS The "socio-economic" factors are admittedly the most difficult ones to quantify. In this connection, the socio-economic elements that appear to cause the greatest amount of concern to the area residents are: 1) Neighborhood Disruption 2) Displacement of Families and Businesses 3) Loss in Property Values (or Gains) 4) Effects on Historic Sites 5) Effects on Hospitals 6) Effects on Parks 7) Effects on Churches 8) Effects on Schools 1. Neighborhood Disruption Neighborhood disruption (or splitting) on I-35E occurs primarily in the West 7th St. - Randolph Ave. segment of the proposed project with the general concentration in the area immediately north of West 7th St. At this location, proposed I-35E follows a north -south grid whereas the street pattern in the affected neighborhood is a "diagonal" one. Proposed I-35E cuts through parts of 5 blocks in this segment. In the Randolph Ave. - Jefferson Ave. and Jefferson Ave. - VictoriaSt. segments, the proposed I-35E alignment traverses marginal use lands with poor soils and generally difficult topography. The proposed roadway between Victoria St. and St. Clair Ave. skirts the edge of a commercial area and otherwise cuts through relatively unused lands. From St. Clair Ave. to the Grand Ave. Ramsey St. interchange, I-35E follows the lower edge of the "bluff". This is the natural divide between the II - 45 "bluff" and "flats" area neighborhoods. In its present form, there is a cluster of 7 residences between I-35E and Pleasant Ave. in a triangular strip. This area is one subject to other environmental elements such as noise and slope stability. Consequently, there is the possibility that the residents of these homes may choose to move. The segment from the Grand Ave. - Ramsey St. interchange to Kellogg Blvd. is esentially along the same alignment of an existing city street, Pleasant Ave. Moreover, proposed I-35E continues along a distinct divide between the residential area along Summit Ave. on the Muff and the commercial -institutional land use below the "bluff". The foregoing relates to the physical aspects of disruption along the proposed I-35E alignment. It does not deal with the magnitude of social dis- ruption possible in the bluff area residential areas. Some residents of the Summit Hill community have indicated that there could be a mass exodus of talented and high -income families from the area should I-35E be constructed. The primary premise for the statement is that noise, air pollution, and other negative factors from I-35E degrade the "quality of life" in the area. As a result, high -income families who are the most mobile and most readily able to leave would do so. There are no definite means by which one could determine the magnitude of such an occurrence should it come to pass. However, if large numbers of high -income families should depart from the area and the City of Saint Paul, II - 46 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t it would represent a loss that the City would certainly wish to avoid. A 1972 report by the Saint Paul Housing and Redevelopment Authority entitled "Summit Hill Community, A Statistical Analysis" reveals some notable trends in census tracts 356 and 357. First, housing values in the area appreciated from an average of $20, 000 in 1960 to $28, 600 in 1970, or by 43%. Corresponding figures for Saint Anthony Park, a comparable community, were $17, 500, $24, 700, and 41. 1%. Second, the area has distinct sub -neighborhoods with the section south of Lincoln Ave. an upper -income family community and the section north a lower -income elderly and young families combination. (The section south of Lincoln Ave. is towards the "bluff". ) Third, the area has demonstrated the ability to recycle itself with young families moving in as older families departed. A point of interest here is that people, despite the knowledge that freeway construction was likely on I-35E, have continued to move into the area. A remark that this occurred in spite of the adverse connotations placed on I-35E by some and through the persuasive powers of real estate agents is difficult to accept. Rather, it suggests that the Summit -Hill area exhibits features desirable to young and medium -to -high income families. These no doubt include the historic character, architecture, and culture that pervades parts, not all, of the area. In this connection, it requires noting that the area has experienced and is continuing to experience dynamic changes. For example, large dwellings along Summit Ave. , which used to be occupied by prominent families, in the past, are II - 47 now structures converted into apartments and rooming houses. Moreover, as noted in the aforementioned St. Paul HRA study, older apartment buildings in the area are a potential source of decay. Further, the educational opportu- nities available to area children are undergoing significant shifts. Private schools to which considerable numbers of well-to-do families send their children are in financial difficulty (at least one prominent one - Our Lady of Peace Girl's School - will not reopen its doors in the Fall of 1973). It is probable that adverse developments in these aspects of the community would have greater disruptive effects on the neighborhood than proposed I-35E would. Finally, there is evidence that other neighborhoods in the Twin Cities metropolitan area subjected to freeway and/or heavily travelled major arterials with large percentages of trucks have not experienced wholesale social disruptions. The Kenwood area in Minneapolis, Snelling Ave. in Saint Paul (between Larpenteur Ave. and County Rd. B), sections of Richfield and Edina along I-35W and Co. Rd. 62 respectively are examples. To be sure, the characteristics of the areas mentioned above are not all similar to those in the bluff area. Nonetheless, they do share a common feature in that they are medium -to -upper -income level areas. In sum, it is probable that the charm and architectural character of the first line of "bluff" homes will continue to draw medium -to -high income families, albeit perhaps on a slightly eroded scale. As one advances inward from the bluff, the "family" section south of Lincoln Ave. is likely to remain stable. The section II - 48 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 north of Lincoln Ave. , however, will continue to undergo general change of which there is evidence now. North of Lincoln Ave. , three influences and life styles tend to present themselves. The first street north of Lincoln Ave. and parallel to it is Grand Ave. , where land use has become increasingly "commercial". The second parallel street north of Lincoln Ave. is Summit Ave. , where both renovation of the old buildings and continued apartment -use of them share the development pattern. Finally, the third influence has to do with the area directly north of Summit Ave. where relatively low-income families are in the majority. The general changes in this particular strip are likely to continue to reflect the "mixing" process between the aforementioned 3 influences regard- less of whether I-35E is constructed in the Pleasant Ave. corridor or not. However, with I-35E in the corridor, Grand Ave. would probably prove more attractive for commercial development than otherwise. 1 II - 49 2. Displacement of Families and Businesses It should be understood at the outset that displacements of families and businesses that proposed I-35E would be responsible for have already occurred. The land has been purchased and cleared; the displaced families have relocated; and the businesses affected have moved. On the basis of aerial photography and design drawings counts, a total of about 230 dwellings (mostly single family) were acquired for proposed I-35E right-of-way. Assuming a family size of 4. 0 to 4. 5 persons per unit, this translates into between 1120 and 1235 persons displaced. It is probable that an additional 30 or so persons residing in the Pleasant Ave. - St. Clair Ave. area will depart if I-35E is constructed. These are the persons living in the 7 homes along the southeasterly side of Pleasant Ave. where the slope movement of August 1972 took place (see Slope Stability Section). Their location is one which would consistently have a high noise ex- posure because of proximity and difficulties in shielding should I-35E go in. As a result, should these persons desire to leave, any assistance necessary to ease the effects of the displacement experience will be available. Replacement housing is available in the City. In terms of business, about 5 businesses stood in the path of proposed I-35E in the vicinity of the new Saint Paul Civic Center. One of the businesses affected, an automobile dealership, relocated within a short distance from its old location, and later closed (1973) II - 50 1 1 1 1 The automobile dealership, Civic Center Chrysler -Plymouth, went out of business because of steadily declining sales. According to the Chrysler Corporations regional marketing office in April of 1974, the primary reason for the sales decline was the extended construction activity in the vicinity of the dealership which left it inaccessible over long periods of time. The construction activity referred to includes the building of the St. Paul Civic Center Complex along with all the related street alignment changes; the general redevelopment which is continuing in the immediate vicinity; and right- of-way acquisitions and land clearing for proposed I-35E. Chrysler Corp. also noted that right-of-way taken for I-35E left the dealership with less than sufficient space for used car operations. Thus, it appears that proposed I-35E did contribute to the closing of Civic Center Chrysler -Plymouth although it was certainly not the only factor. 3. Loss in Property Values (Or Gains) The North Star R&D Institute study, "The Economic Impact of the Freeway System on the Twin Cities Area", states that freeways have negligible effect on residential property values in the affected areas. However, the study notes that residences on frontage roads facing freeways experienced a slower rate of appreciation than comparable units away from the interstates did. In effect, they had a loss in property value. This corroborates national evidence that residential property values along interstate highways do suffer losses on the order of 8% to 15%. However , this decline does not carry over more than 1 block in. This suggests that residences in the nearest 1 block in the segment of I-35E from West 7th St. to Randolph Ave. would experience relative losses of this magnitude. In other words, the dwellings would appreciate regardless, but at a lesser rate than comparable dwellings further removed from the free- way. The estimated number of residences thus affected totals about 120 units. Between Randolph Ave. and Jefferson Ave., and between Jefferson Ave. and Victoria St. , the effects should result in losses between none and 10%. The same percentages are applicable in the segment from Victoria Street to St. Clair Ave. II - 52 From St. Clair Ave. to the Grand Ave. -Ramsey St. interchange, the situation is mixed. On the one hand, there are the high -value bluff residences and on the other, the lower -value units in the flats. In addition, there is an array of apartment buildings in the vicinity of the interchange. (Apt. buildings hold their own or appreciate in value and often serve as a buffer line between residential districts and more intense land uses. ) R. Parranto, a "bluff" area resident and former president of the St. Paul Board of Realtors. has indicated that the bluff properties can be expected to experience losses of up to 40% with 20% to 30% probably more realistic. The higher than previously stated (8% - 15%) percentages are based on the premise that higher -value residences, which usually are situated in areas with amenities, are subject to greater than average losses when the amenity factors are removed. These high percentages apply mainly to the bluff edge homes. In the flats, the relative losses are likely to be in the 10% - 15% range. The segment from Grand Ave. - Ramsey St. to Kellogg Blvd. should be unaffected for all practical purposes. The number of residences affected are too few and the projected land use in the area is "commercial". The preceding paragraphs have dealt with probable would-be losses in residential values resulting from I-35E. However, another aspect of the property value picture exists. This relates to the fact that the "flats" areas from St. Clair Ave. in towards the City center include sections which are candidates for urban renewal efforts. Accordingly, if examples from other cities are any indication, the probable type of renewal would be one where land II - 53 use would be more intensive than before (i. e. apartment buildings, townhouses, and other multiple -family dwellings). From a City of Saint Paul revenue standpoint, this would, in all probability, result in a more favorable situation than that existing. It is not possible to quantify this revenue because its amount depends on the extent of investment - public and private - that flows into the area. In this connection, the revitali- zation in progress around the Civic Center in Saint Paul should provide impetus to such development in the areas zoned commercial and residential C & Cl. This suggests that the vicinity of the proposed Grand Ave. - Ramsey St. interchange and the segment northward to Kellogg Blvd. are most likely to undergo development and/or redevelopment first. These are areas which already include apartment type and commercial land uses. That the foregoing loss and gain factors would occur in considerable mag- nitude is not a certainty. There are no "absolutes" when it comes to predictions that depend on a great array of factors over which there are, at best, very limited controls. However, the discussion presented identifies the probable effects of I-35E if it should be constructed. If the changes in Minneapolis are any indication, the tax base removed or harmed by proposed I-35E is likely to be replaced and improved upon by new development. II - 54 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4. Effects on Historic Sites References to Section I - Land Use (p. I - 20) and to fig. 12 (p. I - 24) remind one that proposed I-35E abuts an area designated as a historic hill district by the 1973 Minnesota State Legislature. The hill district boundaries are closest to the proposed I-35E construction in the Grand Ave. - Ramsey St. to Kellogg Blvd. segment (Segment 6). The National Register of Historic Places, a Federal publication of the U.S. Department of the Interior, Office of Archeology and Historic Preserva- tion, lists sites deemed to exhibit national historic significance. Two buildings listed in the Register are on Summit Ave. on the bluff side of proposed I-35E's Segment 6 and overlook the roadway. An additional 2 sites, a building and a park are three blocks away on the right with a major parallel arterial street (West 7th St. ) in between. The first 2 buildings are the James J. Hill House and the Burbank - Livingston -Griggs House at 240 Summit and 432 Summit Ave. respectively. The former is an 1889 structure that was the home of one of America's great railroad builders. The National Register describes the latter as an "elaborate and substantial Italianate house" which externally retains its original appear- ance of 1862-1863. The Alexander Ramsey House at 265 S. Exchange St. and Irvine Park immediately adjacent are the other 2 sites listed in the Register. The Ramsey House is a 3-story building built out of gray Minnesota limestone and described 1 II - 55 as "Second Empire" in style. (Ramsey was Minnesota's first territorial governor (1849) and later served in the U.S. Senate and as Secretary of War (1879-1881). The house was built between 1868 and 1872 and remains much as it was during when Ramsey lived in it. The "Criteria for Effect" is being applied by FHWA, MHD, and the Minnesota Historical Society in accordance with established procedures for compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. From the standpoint of proposed I-35E, the most prominent building is the former German Presbyterian Bethlehem Church located at 311 Ramsey St. , which was designed by the well-known Minnesota Architect Cass Gilbert (designer of the Minnesota State Capitol) in 1890. The proposed design on I-35E does not necessitate its acquisition, although its location in relationship to the freeway is not an advantageous one. (It lies just below the side of the south -bound I-35E bridge over Grand Ave. ) While the church is not in the National Register, because of its historic significance to Minnesota, the building merits special consideration. It is the opinion of the Consultants that any alternative relative to I-35E should preserve this structure. There are recent (1974) indications that the Minnesota Historical Society may include the church in a new list of Minnesota sites which will be recommended for inclusion in the National Register. Thus, for all practical purposes, this move automatically results in the Cass Gilbert church requiring treatment as a historic site as far as proposed I-35E Environmental Impact Statements are concerned. II - 56 1 1 At this point, it is necessary to identify the ramifications of the 1) Consul- tant's opinion that the building be preserved and 2) the Minnesota Historical Society's considerations which could result in the buildings designation as a national historic site. (Note: these two acts occurred totally independent of one another. ) The first factor that affects the Cass Gilbert building case is that it is under private ownership. (Developers D. Sausser and P. Hedberg of St. Paul are the owners. ) This factor limits the funding options available to the Minnesota Depart- ment of Highways and other public agencies with respect to saving the structure if it is deemed a "public good" to do so. Legally, the maximum amount of monies that MHD can expend on a building in this category cannot exceed the appraised market value that would be used for its acquisition. For example, if the possibility existed that such buildings could be saved by relocating them, this can be done. However, if moving costs exceed the outright acquisition prices of the buildings, the difference between the purchase and moving costs has to come from a source other than MHD. In the Cass Gilbert church case, it appears that the cost of moving the build- ing further up the hillside will be cheaper than its purchase price. (This is based on preliminary estimates given to the Consultant by industry sources in March, 1973.) Even so, MHD requirements call for the purchase of the land and building. However, it is possible for the owners to retain title to the building and move it after appropriate cost adjustments have been made. At that point, II - 57 the owners would have the right once again to do as they desire with the building (including the right to demolish it. ) An alternative is to have a public non-profit entity purchase the building. This would permit funding from more sources for the costs which may be incurred in efforts to preserve it. However, to find such entities with the financial capa- bility to not only purchase but also maintain such structures is difficult. Conse- quently, this option is a hard one to implement. The foregoing illustrates that the legal limitations under which public agencies operate at times do not permit them to carry out or fund worthy causes regardless of their desirability. Thus, the net result with respect to the Cass Gilbert church is that funds in addition to those MHD can provide may be necessary to preserve it. Note: The Minnesota Historical Society and the Minnesota Department of Highways are cooperating in a study to determine the effects of proposed I-35E on historic sites in the area. II - 58 5. Effects on Hospitals With Childrens Hospital, St. Luke's Division of United Hospitals, Inc. , and Miller Division of United Hospitals, Inc. directly fronting on proposed I-35E right-of-way and the St. Joseph's Hospital complex slightly removed from it, the effects of a freeway in the Pleasant Ave. corridor on hospitals are signifi- cant. In this connection, the generally adverse effects of freeway -generated noise, vibration, and air pollution have been covered separately earlier in this Section. The socio-economic effects of I-35E relate to how it affects the inter- dependency between the hospitals and their immediate surroundings. This is so because there appears to be a current trend where medical -professional office complexes are developing near hospitals and this appears to be the case near St. Luke's division of United Hospitals, Inc. In addition, there is general redevelopment going on in the area of the hospitals. Based on these factors, there is a greater likelihood that the area around the hospitals will upgrade rather than deteriorate. It is important to also note that inner-city hospitals are in the process of having to adjust to changing conditions in the area of health care delivery in the Twin Cities metropolitan area. As people have moved outward, inner-city hospitals have generally faced a decline in the concentration of people from which they could expect to draw patients. Thus, from a strictly economic sense, it would seem that the affected hospitals would tend to benefit from improved access to them. II - 59 6. Effects on Parks and Playgrounds Four parks and 7 playgrounds exist in the I-35E project area (see Tables I-3a and I-3b). The proposed I-35E construction calls for using 0. 005 acres of designated public park lands and about 0. 11 acres of playgrounds. The City of Saint Paul superintendents of Recreation and Parks respectively indicated in interviews with the Consultants in February of 1973, that noise levels from freeways have not proved detrimental to activities in "active" parks and playgrounds at other locations in the City. The "passive" activity parks along proposed I-35E are generally outside of the 70 dBA limit lines alluded to under comments regarding noise pollution given earlier in this Section. It appears that the effects of I-35E on the area's parks and playgrounds should be minimal at worst. City of Saint Paul Council resolutions and correspondence from the Saint Paul Schools indicate that the use of the public park land and the play- grounds do not constitute Section 4(f) involvement in that they do not represent recreation areas, or wildlife and waterfowl refuges of National, State or local significance. Copies of these resolutions and correspondence appear in Appendix 7. The parks and school playgrounds affected are at Cathedral Park and at Jefferson and Lindsay Schools. Note: The Minnesota Department of Highways has already acquired these rights - of -way and easements in accordance with construction needs for building I-35E as currently proposed in the Pleasant Ave. corridor (i. e. Alt. 2) . II - 60 7. Effects on Churches The comments regarding the Christ Episcopal Church given below are for informational purposes only. The church was damaged extensively in a fire on March 10, 1974 and has since been demolished. The proposed I-35E alignment requires the taking of one church, the Christ Episcopal Church, located at 149 Pleasant Ave. , St. Paul. With reference to this church, which is an attractive limestone structure, MHD plans with -and -without acquisition were prepared. Negotiations with the church elders of some years finally led to the Church Congregation's decision to rebuild in Woodbury, a suburb of Saint Paul. Once the Congregation decided to move, it was the expressed desire of the leaders of Christ Episcopal Church that the church be taken for I-35E right-of-way. (The current MHD plans do take the church property. ) The City of Saint Paul has a heavy concentration of prominent churches along Summit Ave. from the Cathedral at the top of the bluff near Kellogg Blvd. westward. Geometrically, Summit Ave. digresses from the proposed I-35E alignment as it moves westerly (5 blocks away at Dale St. , 9 blocks away at Victoria St. ). There are at least 5 prominent churches between the Cathedral and Victoria St. along Summit Ave. along with others off of it. A congragation leader, Rev. C. W. Didier of the House of Hope Presbyterian Church, has indicated that the churches would suffer if the high -income families residing in the area moved away because of I-35E. II - 61 8. Effects on Schools As alluded to in the land use portion of Section I of this report, proposed I-35E generally follows an alignment which closely approximates current Saint Paul public school boundaries. The schools within a 500-ft. band on either side of proposed I-35E are (from south end to north end of project area): 1) Riverside Elementary 2) Adams Elementary 3) Monroe Junior and Senior High 4) Davis Elementary 5) Hammond Special Elementary 6) Jefferson Elementary 7) Lindsay Special Elementary The school boundaries for these facilities appear in fig. 15 in Section I. The Saint Paul School Board is in the process of consolidation efforts but these include proposed I-35E as a given. The most critical school in the I-35E project area was the Lindsay School for the Physically Handicapped at 310 Pleasant Ave. This facility is the only public school for the Physically Handicapped in the City of Saint Paul. It is situated southwesterly and adjacent to the St. Luke's division of United Hospitals, Inc. The Saint Paul Schools Administration decided in 1973 to abandon Lindsay School. The 80-plus students will be integrated into other schools. The Executive Director of School Plant Planning and Maintenance indicated to the TI - 62 Consultant in April of 1973 that the primary reasons for abandoning the school were: 1) The administration considers it important to integrate Physically Handicapped children with children without handicaps so that their education experiences are more broad. 2) The area around the school is generally commercial and institutional in character and that there had been a desire to relocate it for quite some time. 3) It is an older facility. Note: The possibility of I-35E construction was a minor consideration. II - 63 C. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR SUMMARY Table II-9 represents an environmental score sheet prepared for the purpose of attempting to identify the areas of the I-35E project area most adversely affected. It is, in part, subjective, a fact which is difficult to avoid in the area of socio-economic factors. It includes the 7 physical and 8 socio-economic factors discussed in Section II. However, it does not place relative magnitudes of importance for the factors included. Based on the tabulation, it appears that the Grand Ave. - Ramsey St. to Kellogg Blvd. segment of proposed I-35E (Seg. 6) has the largest number of environmental factors affected (10) by the roadway. The St. Clair Ave. to Grand Ave. - Ramsey St. stretch (Seg. 5) shows up with the second highest number of such factors (9+). Together these two segments account for slightly more than one-third of the total proposed I-35E construction in terms of length. Segment 1, extending from West 7th St. to Randolph Ave. is a distant third with 6 environmental factors affected. (Note: The significance of socio-economic environmental factors such as neighborhood disruption and displacement of persons and businesses is somewhat moot because they have already occurred. ) II - 64 TABLE II - 9 PROPOSED I-35E PROJECT AREA ENVIRONMENTAL SCORE SHEET Category of Seg. Seg. Seg. Seg. Seg. Seg. Seg. Effect 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Remarks Physical Factors 1. Noise Pollution X X X X X X X 2. Air Quality X X X X X X X 3. Vibration X Final Design Item 4. Slope Stability X X X Final Design Item 5. Area Vegetation X X 6. Aesthetics X X X 7. Water Pollution Socio Economic Factors 1. Disruption of Neighborhoods X ? 2. Displacement of Persons X 3. Property Values X X 4. Historic Sites X X 5. Parks and Playgrounds X 6. Hospitals X X 7. Churches X X X 8. Schools X X Totals: 6 2 2 4 9+ 10 4 Notes: Segments 1 through 7 are for 1) West 7th - Randolph; 2) Randolph - Jefferson; 3) Jefferson - Victoria; 4) Victoria - St. Clair; 5) St. Clair - Grand -Ramsey; 6) Grand -Ramsey - Kellogg; and 7) Kellogg - I-94. Evaluations are partly of a subjective nature. SECTION III PUBLIC INPUT TO REPORT 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 SECTION III - PUBLIC INPUT TO REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES SECTION SUMMARY AND COMMENTS III -a III-b III-c - III-d A. SUMMARY III-c B. COMMENTS III-d III. PUBLIC INPUT TO REPORT III-1 - III- 15 A. GENERAL III-1 B. CONSULTANT'S TASKS III-2 C. PUBLIC CONTACTS III-4 D. RESULTS OF PUBLIC INPUT III- 14 1 LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF ALL CONSULTANT MEETINGS WITH PUBLIC PARTIES AND SELECTED GOVERNMENT AGENCIES III-7-III-8 III - 2 LIST OF CONSULTANT MEETINGS WITH III-9 RESIDENTS IN PROTEST OVER I-35E (RIP 35E) III - 3 LIST OF CONSULTANT CONTACTS WITH III- 10 OFFICIALS OF HOSPITALS AND DISCUSSIONS WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF NURSING AND BOARDING CARE HOMES ALONG THE PROPOSED I-35E ROUTE IN SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA III - 4 LIST OF CONSULTANT MEETINGS WITH CITY OF SAINT PAUL ORGANIZATIONS AND/OR REPRESENTATIVES LIST OF CONSULTANT MEETINGS WITH PUBLIC AND PRIVATE PARTIES IN DAKOTA COUNTY LIST OF CONSULTANT MEETINGS WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF CITY OF SAINT PAUL AND OF METROPOLITAN GOVERNMENT III - 12 III - b SECTION III - SECTION SUMMARY AND COMMENTS A. SUMMARY The Consultant, acting as an impartial third party, commenced work for this Report in late August, 1972. At that time, RIP 35E and the City of St. Paul had already initiated litigation proceedings against the Minnesota Department of Highways (MHD), the Federal Department of Transportation (DOT), and related representatives asking that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the project be prepared in accordance with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969. (Note: RIP 35E stands for Residents In Protest Over I-35E, a citizen's group opposed to I-35E construction in the Pleasant Ave. corridor. ) The Consultant's tasks were 1) to establish credibility among the factions involved, 2) to acquaint RIP 35E and all other interested parties with trans- portation planning procedures, and 3) to actively seek out input from the public from as broad a source base as possible. In the course of the study effort, the Consultant has participated in over 50 meetings with parties interested in the I-35E project (see Table III-1). In addition, the Consultant has received over 25 correspondences and engaged in well over 100 lengthy telephone calls. The meetings in which the Consultant participated were either for the purpose of making presentations or for acquiring public input on specific items about the project. The parties with whom the Consultant has had several contacts include RIP 35E, United Hospitals, Inc. , St. Paul Chamber of Commerce, Operation 85 (a civic group) and the Dakota County Development Association. (See Tables III-2 through III-6. ) The results of the Public's input reflect themselves in the selection of some of the alternatives evaluated in this Report. For example, RIP 35E participated in the formulation and selection of 3 highway alternates included in the study. These were Alternates 4, 5 and 6, described hereafter in Section IV. In addition, the public involvement process has hopefully led to a better -informed public. B. COMMENTS As the record suggests, the degree of public involvement associated with this Report is substantial. Moreover, the representation of adversary views (i. e. those in support of and those opposed to proposed I-35E) was some- what balanced. If anything, the "anti" -Pleasant Ave. corridor view received greater attention from the Consultant than vice versa. In large measure, this occurred because RIP 35E was the best organized and best prepared adversary group and had formulated its positions in reasonable detail. Not included in Section III of this Report but also of primary public input importance are the results of a survey of representatives of the City of St. Paul's Central Business District (see Appendix 1). The firm, Mid -Continent Surveys, Inc. , Midwest Plaza Bldg. , Minneapolis, Minnesota conducted the survey. III - d SECTION III - PUBLIC INPUT TO REPORT A. GENERAL To understand the impact of the public's input into this Report, it is necessary to review the circumstances under which the study effort for it got underway in late August of 1972. At that time, the situation was one in which: 1. Much information as well as much misinformation about proposed I-35E had spread in the public arena. 2. RI.P 35E and the City of St. Paul, plaintiffs in litigation against the Minnesota Department of Highways (MHD), et. al. , and MHD had reached an agreement to have an independent and impartial Third Party start studies for the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). (Note: The Agreement between the Parties called for an EIS complying with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969. ) 3. RIP 35E, the most active citizens group in opposition to the construction of proposed I-35E in the Pleasant Ave. corridor, had publicly urged that an Alternative route for I-35E be found and that the Pleasant Ave. corridor be used for different purposes such as a "new town in town" with "greenways, bicycle trails, etc. ". (Note: RIP 35E was suggesting that a potential alternative route for consideration could be one in Dakota County whereby I-35E would follow inplace County Road 30 to the east and continue northerly along existing Trunk Highway 3. This Alternative is essentially the same one as Alt. 6 described in Section IV. ) 4. Opponents of I-35E construction in the Pleasant Ave. corridor were insisting that decisions regarding interstate highways made in the 1940's or 1950's were not necessarily valid in the 1970's. Thus, the opponents contended that a re-evaluation of the proposed project in light of current knowledge was in order. B. CONSULTANT'S TASKS Given the circumstances which prevailed at the beginning of the study for this Report, three primary tasks confronted the Consultant. First, there was the task of establishing credibility as an impartial third party. Second, there was the task of acquainting citizens groups and all other interested parties with the elements of the transportation planning process. And Third, there was the task of proceeding with the effort of seeking out and gathering as much public input to the Report as possible. 1. Establishing Credibility as an impartial Third Party is difficult under the best of circumstances. It is all the more difficult when, for lack of any other participants, the Minnesota Department of Highways funds the Third Party's study efforts. In order to establish a degree of credibility, all parties agreed to a set of basic rules that stated that while all meetings held in connection with the study would not be joint meetings attended by all parties, representatives of one group could sit in on meetings of another. If it was not possible for an outside representative to be present, then the Consultant provided the interested parties with the pertinent details of the meetings. The intent throughout the study effort was to keep all parties apprised of ongoing activities. In this manner, the Consultant's hope was to maintain an atmosphere of fairness and credibility. 2. Acquainting interested parties with the elements of the transportation planning process was one of the Consultant's primary objectives in connection with the study effort. It was important to identify the factors used by government agencies such as the Minnesota Department of Highways in transportation planning so that the validity of the process could be evaluated. In addition, it was the Consultant's opinion that both those in favor and those in opposition to I-35E construction could articulate their positions more intelli- gently if they had access to a better understanding of the strengths and weak- nesses of the planning procedures used. 3. Seeking out and recording the public's input was important because government agencies have been coming under increasing criticism for not paying enough attention to the public's concerns. Whether such criticism, if any, is justified or not in the I-35E case is not for the Consultant to decide. However, to make certain that there would be no such criticism with respect to the proposed I-35E study was within the Consultant's control. To this end, there was a concerted effort to meet with, discuss, and listen to as many responsible parties interested in the I-35E project as possible. These contacts were in the form of face-to-face meetings; of telephone conversations; and of written material (i. e. letters, notes, etc. ). A record of the more major contacts appears in Tables III-1 through III-6. C. PUBLIC CONTACTS Table III-1 lists the number of meetings the Consultant has attended throughout the course of this study. These meetings were for a variety of purposes. For example, there were a series of meetings (21) with RIP 35E on a near -weekly basis. Similarly, there were contacts with the hospitals situated in the I-35E link; with a variety of City of St. Paul Civic and business organizations; with Dakota County interests; and with other responsible and involved parties. Reference to Table III-1 indicates that the Consultant has participated in over 50 formal or semi -formal meetings. The table excludes at least twice as many related telephone contacts with parties who provided relevant input to the Report. In addition, the Consultant has received over 25 correspondences regarding proposed I-35E. The record tends to support the notion that the public has had significant involvement with and input to this Report. Because RIP 35E was the most active and best organized group, the Consultant had the greatest number of meetings and contacts with them. Table III-2 lists the meetings held with RIP 35E. As the table shows, there III - 4 were about 72 hours of discussions and presentations in the meetings. The Consultant knows that RIP 35E provided input of great importance. The hope is that RIP 35E benefitted also. Table III-3 gives the Consultant's contacts with the hospitals and nursing and boarding homes in the I-35E project area. The hospitals have had ample opportunities to articulate their concerns regarding proposed I-35E and have done so. The list of the Consultant's meetings with City of St. Paul organizations appears in Table III-4. In large measure, these meetings were for the purpose of exchanging information. However, one meeting, the one on February 26, 1973 was of special importance. On that date, Operation 85 sponsored and hosted a meeting at which most of the invited parties expressed their views with respect to proposed I-35E after the Consultant's presentation about the alternatives under consideration. The invited parties included representatives of the City of St. Paul, the Metropolitan Council, the Minnesota Department of Highways, RIP 35E, Dakota County and its various municipalities, St. Paul civic groups, and hospital representatives. The comments presented by the various parties at this February 26, 1973 meeting appear in the Appendix section of this Report. Table III-5 lists the Consultant's meetings with Dakota County parties. In general, the input from these meetings centered on the fact that Dakota County parties were in favor of keeping proposed I-35E in its currently planned corridor within the County. They did not want any changes made now because all decisions in the County had been predicated on a proposed I-35E location they had considered fixed. Finally, Table III-6 lists the meetings the Consultant had with represent- atives of the City of St. Paul and of metropolitan agencies. These meetings were for informational purposes wherein the Consultant learned of the most current policies and views of the agencies. In turn, the governmental bodies acquainted themselves with the Consultant's activities. III - 6 TABLE III - 1 CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF ALL CONSULTANT MEETINGS WITH PUBLIC PARTIES AND SELECTED GOVERNMENT AGENCIES Date Met With 1. September 5, 1972 RIP 35E 2. September 12, 1972 RIP 35E 3. September 18, 1972 United Hospitals 4. September 19, 1972 RIP 35E 5. September 20, 1972 Childrens Hospitals 6. September 26, 1972 RIP 35E 7. September 27, 1972 Dakota Co. Municipalities 8. October 3, 1972 RIP 35E 9. October 4, 1972 Dakota Co. Engineers Assoc. 10. October 10, 1972 RIP 35E 11. October 17, 1972 RIP 35E 12. October 24, 1972 RIP 35E 13. November 2, 1972 RIP 35E 14. November 9, 1972 RIP 35E 15. November 13, 1972 St. Paul Mayor's Advisory Board 16. November 14, 1972 RIP 35E 17. November 17, 1972 United Hospitals, Inc. 18. November 17, 1972 D. Sausser & P. Hedberg, Developers 19. November 21, 1972 RIP 35E 20. November 28, 1972 RIP 35E 21. November 29, 1972 St. Paul Chamber of Commerce 22. December 4, 1972 West 7th St. Business and Professional Assoc. 23. December 5, 1972 RIP 35E 24. December 12, 1972 RIP 35E 25. December 14, 1972 Civic Center Authority 26. January 2, 1973 RIP 35E 27. January 5, 1973 Associated Capitol Hospitals, Inc. 28. January 12, 1973 Dayton -Hudson Development Corp. 29. January 16, 1973 RIP 35E 30. January 17, 1973 St. Paul Public Works Dept. 31. January 18, 1973 Dakota Co. Development Assoc. 32. January 22, 1973 St. Paul Trades and Labor Assembly Civic Group 33. January 23, 1973 RIP 35E 34. January 30, 1973 RIP 35E 35. January 31, 1973 Operation 85 (St. Paul Civic Group) Representative 36. February 12, 1973 M. H. D. - Metropolitan Council - St. Paul 37. February 13, 1973 Metropolitan Transit Commission 38. February 14, 1973 Operation 85 Representatives III - 7 39. February 21, 1973 40. February 26, 1973 41. March 3-15, 1973 42. March 9, 1973 43. March 23, 1973 44. March 27, 1973 45. March 28, 1973 46. March 29, 1973 47. April 4, 1973 48. April 24, 1973 49. April 26, 1973 50. May 8, 1973 51. May 30, 1973 52. November 27, 1973 53. February 21, 1974 54. March 19, 1974 TABLE III - 1 (Continued) St. Paul Parks and Recreation Dept. Operation 85 - Sponsored public meeting for all interested parties Conducted telephone survey of petitioners favoring I-35E construction (Random one-third sample contacted) Metropolitan Council Representative United Hospitals, Inc. RIP 35E Dun and Curry, Developers United Hospitals, Inc. Dakota Co. Engineers Assoc. Ballard Storage Co. St. Paul Chamber of Commerce Steering Committee Sperry UNIVAC Co. St. Paul Chamber of Commerce St. Paul City Council Dakota Co. Development Assoc. St. Paul Jaycees TABLE III - 2 LIST OF CONSULTANT MEETINGS WITH RESIDENTS IN PROTEST OVER I-35E (RIP 35E) Date Hours 1. September 5, 1972 3 2. September 12, 1972 4 3. September 19, 1972 4 4. September 26, 1972 4 5. October 3, 1972 4 6. October 10, 1972 3 7. October 17, 1972 3 8. October 24, 1972 3 9. November 2, 1972 3 10. November 9, 1972 3 11. November 14, 1972 4 12. November 21, 1972 4 13. November 28, 1972 4 14. December 5, 1972 3 15. December 12, 1972 3 16. January 2, 1973 3 17. January 9, 1973 3 18. January 16, 1973 3 19. January 23, 1973 4 20. January 30, 1973 3 21. March 27, 1973 4 Total 72 III - 9 TABLE III - 3 LIST OF CONSULTANT CONTACTS WITH OFFICIALS OF HOSPITALS AND DISCUSSIONS WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF NURSING AND BOARDING CARE HOMES ALONG THE PROPOSED I-35E ROUTE IN SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA Date 1. September 18, 1972 2. September 20, 1972 3. November 17, 1972 4. January 5, 1973 5. March 23, 1973 6. March 29, 1973 7. April 10, 1973 8. April 12, 1973 Institution United Hospitals, Inc. Children's Hospital United Hospitals, Inc. Associated Capitol Hospitals, Inc. United Hospitals, Inc. United Hospitals, Inc. Pleasant Hills Nursing Home (by telephone) Hoikka House (by telephone) TABLE III - 4 LIST OF CONSULTANT MEETINGS WITH CITY OF SAINT PAUL ORGANIZATIONS AND/OR REPRESENTATIVES Date 1. November 29, 1972 2. December 4, 1972 3. December 14, 1972 4. January 22, 1973 5. January 31, 1973 6. February 14, 1973 7. February 26, 1973 8. April 26, 1973 9. May 30, 1973 10. March 19, 1974 Organization Chamber of Commerce West Seventh St. Business and Professional Association Civic Center Authority St. Paul Trades and Labor Assembly(AFL-CTO) Operation 85* Operation 85* Operation 85* Chamber of Commerce Chamber of Commerce Junior Chamber of Commerce *Operation 85 is a non-profit civic organization which includes practically all of the City of St. Paul's civic leaders and is active in planning efforts for the City's future. 1. TABLE III - 5 LIST OF CONSULTANT MEETINGS WITH PUBLIC AND PRIVATE PARTIES IN DAKOTA COUNTY Date September 27, 1972 2. October 4, 1972 3. January 12, 1973 4. January 18, 1973 5. April 4, 1973 6. February 21, 1974 Party Representatives of Dakota County Municipalities Dakota County Engineers Association Dayton -Hudson Development Corporation Dakota County Development Association Dakota County Engineers Association Dakota County Development Association TABLE III - 6 LIST OF CONSULTANT MEETINGS WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF CITY OF SAINT PAUL AND OF METROPOLITAN GOVERNMENT Date 1. November 13, 1972 2. January 8, 1973 3. January 17, 1973 4. February 12, 1973 5. February 13, 1973 6. February 21, 1973 7. March 9, 1973 8. November 27, 1973 Party St. Paul Mayor's Advisory Board on I-35E St. Paul Mayor's Advisory Board on I-35E St. Paul Department of Public Works Metropolitan Council and City of St. Paul* Metropolitan Transit Commission St. Paul Parks and Recreation Department Metropolitan Council St. Paul City Council *Meeting held at Minnesota Department of Highways D. RESULTS OF PUBLIC INPUT There is considerable evidence in this Report that the public's input has been extensive and significant. For example, the Appendix section includes some aspects of the public's input. However, the most important input into the Report manifests itself in the selection of the alternatives studied. It requires noting at this point that the alternatives selected for study represent the results of a combination of two influences. The first influence is the requirements for the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement type of study which stipulate that at least the Do-nothing alternative to the Proposed project had to be evaluated. The second influence is basically RIP 35E,who suggested that the Shepard Road plan (Alt. 4) and the County Road - T. H. 3 plan (Alt. 6) be included in the study. Alternative 2 is the plan originally proposed by the Minnesota Department of Highways. It is the plan which makes use of the Pleasant Ave. corridor for proposed I-35E construction and which RIP 35E opposes. Alternative 3, which calls for proposed I-35E construction in the Pleasant Ave. corridor but with design modifications to reduce environmental harm, is Consultant -originated. The logic for the selection of Alt. 3 was to establish whether modifications to Alt. 2 would affect notable improvements. Alternative 5 is a plan that evolved from RIP 35E - Consultant discussions. It consists of proposed I-35E being rerouted easterly in Dakota County along proposed I-494 to T. H. 3, and then proceeding northerly along T. H. 3 to a connection point with I-35E near the Capitol Approach Complex. (Please see Section IV for the details of the Alternatives selected. ) In summary, it is fair to say that RIP 35E was most instrumental in the selection of the final set of alternatives studied in this Report. To be sure, this was in part due to the fact that alternatives per se had not been previously studied. Thus, there was no basis to refuse any suggested plan unless it was so obviously out of line that it had no merit at all. Finally, there is little doubt that the public involvement process, by providing a forum for the exchange of relevant information, provided all interested parties with a clearer understanding of I-35E related issues and concerns. The Consultant's hope is that there is a better -informed public with regard to proposed I-35E as a result. SECTION IV ALTERNATES AND THEIR EFFECTS SECTION IV - ALTERNATES AND THEIR EFFECTS TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS IV -a - IV-b LIST OF TABLES IV - c LIST OF FIGURES IV-d SECTION SUMMARY AND COMMENTS IV - e - IV - j A. SUMMARY B. COMMENTS IV-e IV-j IV. ALTERNATES AND THEIR EFFECTS IV-1 - IV - 102 A. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE ALTERNATES B. CRITERIA USED IN THE EVALUATION OF ALTERNATES C. ANALYSES OF ALTERNATES IV-1 IV-9 IV-14 1. ALTERNATE 1 IV-15 a. City of St. Paul Effects IV- 17 b. Dakota County Effects IV-20 c. Conclusion IV-21 2. ALTERNATE 2 IV-22 a. City of St. Paul Effects IV-24 b. Dakota County Effects IV-32 c. Conclusion IV-33 3. ALTERNATE 3 IV-34 a. City of St. Paul Effects IV-35 b. Dakota County Effects IV-46 c. Conclusion IV-47 4. ALTERNATE 4 IV-48 a. City of St. Paul Effects IV-50 b. Dakota County Effects IV-55 c. Conclusion IV-56 5. ALTERNATE 5 IV-57 a. City of St. Paul Effects IV-58 b. Dakota County Effects IV-67 c. Conclusion IV-72 6. ALTERNATE 6 IV-74 a. City of St. Paul Effects IV - 77 b. Dakota County Effects IV-78 c. Conclusion IV-80 7. ALTERNATE 7 IV-81 D. COMPARISON OF ALTERNATES IV-83 1. GENERAL IV-83 2. CONCEPTUAL ACCEPTABILITY N-84 3. ESTIMATED COSTS AND BENEFITS OF IV-90 ALTERNATES 2, 3, 4 and 5 4. CRITERIA SATISFACTION LEVELS IV-101 IV - b IV - 1 IV - 2 IV - 3 IV - 4 IV - 5 IV - 6 IV- 7 IV - 8 IV - 9 SECTION IV - ALTERNATFS AND THEIR EFFECTS LIST OF TABLES PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF IV - 6 PROPOSED I-35E AND ALTERNATES ESTIMATED SOCIAL COSTS FOR ALTERNATE 2 IV - 30 IN PLFASANT AVENUE CORRIDOR ESTIMATED SOCIAL COSTS FOR ALTERNATE 3 IV - 44 IN PLEASANT AVENUE CORRIDOR TWIN CITY METROPOLITAN AREA FREEWAY IV - 92 COST ESTIMATES ESTIMATED COSTS - BENEFITS FOR I-35E IV - 93 IN PLEASANT AVE. CORRIDOR - ALT. 2 ESTIMATED COSTS - BENEFITS FOR I-35E IV - 94 IN PLEASANT AVE. CORRIDOR - ALT. 3 ESTIMATED COSTS - BENEFITS FOR I-35E IV - 96 IN SHEPARD ROAD CORRIDOR - ALT. 4 ESTIMATED COSTS - BENEFITS FOR I-35E IV - 98 IN T. H. 3 CORRIDOR - ALT. 5 (Ramsey County Only) CRITERIA SATISFACTION COMPARISON IV - 102 ALT. 1 THROUGH ALT. 6 IV -c SECTION IV - ALTERNATES AND THEIR EFFECTS LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE PAGE Fig. 35 Location Map for Alternates 2 - 6 Fig. 36 Aerial Photograph of Alternates 2 - 6 Fig. 37 Travel Forecasts for 1985 - Alt. 1 Fig. 38 Travel Forecasts for 1985 - Alt. 2 Fig. 39 Travel Forecasts for 1985 - Alt. 3 Fig. 40 Travel Forecasts for 1985 - Alt. 4 Fig. 41 Travel Forecasts for 1985 in Pleasant Ave. Corridor - Alt. 5 Fig. 42 Travel Forecasts for 1985 in Dakota County - Alt. 5 Fig. 43 Location Map for I-35E Connection from East 7th St. to I-35E North Fig. 44 Land Use Map for West St. Paul Fig. 45 Zoning Map for South St. Paul Fig. 46 Limits of Urbanization for Twin Cities Metropolitan Area - 1990 Fig. 47 Travel Forecasts for 1985 - Alt. 6 IV - 3 IV - 4 IV - 17 IV - 25 IV - 37 IV - 52 IV - 59 IV - 60 IV - 63 IV - 70 IV - 71 IV - 76 IV - 79 IV - d SECTION IV - ALTERNATES AND THEIR EFFECTS SECTION SUMMARY AND COMMENTS A. SUMMARY On the basis of a cursory map examination, RIP 35E and the Consultant selected 5 alternates calling for I-35E construction for evaluation. In addition, the evaluations include the "do-nothing" and "mass transit only" alternates. The "construct I-35E" alternates involve 3 transportation corridors in the City of St. Paul - 1) Pleasant Ave. , 2) Shepard Road, and 3) T. H. 3. In Dakota County, the 5 alternates involve 2 north -south and 2 east -west routes. The north -south routes are 1) the currently proposed corridor in the westerly half of the County, and 2) the new T. H. 3 corridor which passes between the Cities of West St. Paul and South St. Paul. The east -west routes affected are 1) pro- posed I-494 and 2) Dakota County Road No. 30 situated about 4 miles to the south of the I-494 alignment. Specifically, the alternates studied are the 1) Do-nothing; 2) Construct I-35E as currently proposed in the Pleasant Ave. corridor; 3) Construct I-35E in the Pleasant Ave. corridor with design modifications; 4) Construct I-35E along the existing Shepard Road corridor; 5) Construct I-35E in the new T. H. 3 corridor (Lafayette Freeway) with I-35E routings along I-494 and currently proposed I-35E corridors in Dakota Co. ; 6) Construct I-35E in the new T. H. 3 corridor (Lafayette Freeway) with I-35E routings along Dakota County Road 30 and in the currently proposed I-35E corridor in Dakota Co. ; and 7) Mass IV - e transit only. The above descriptions define the locations of proposed I-35E, but exclude the extent of "other" construction related with the alternates. (In the case of Alt. 5, this is an important consideration. ) Refer to figs. 35, 36 and to Table IV-1 for the locations and physical characteristics of Alts. 2 through 5. For use as standards of measurement, the Consultant established 6 primary requirements (i. e. criteria). Five of the criteria relate to transportation characteristics while the sixth is environment -oriented. The criteria represent a combination of items that are 1) generally used in the transportation planning process and 2) related specifically to the proposed I-35E project. The criteria applied to the alternates are: 1. They shall satisfy the travel needs of the areas they are designed to serve. 2. They shall be in general agreement with transportation plans developed for the area (metro). 3. They shall represent a "sound" expenditure of public funds. 4. They shall provide for 2 interstate -standard roadways (north -south) in Dakota County with crossings over the Mississippi River into the City of St. Paul and beyond (and vice versa). 5. They shall to the extent possible, provide a connection to the City's Short Line Road that serves St. Paul's Midway district, an industrial - commercial -transportation center. 6. They shall satisfy environmental requirements to the greatest extent possible. IV - f Lack of definitive data resulted in alternate selections based on a cursory map examination. Because this process has the inherent shortcoming of inadvertently including alternates of little merit, the Consultant decided to apply a 2-step analysis to them. The first step consisted of examining how each alternate rates conceptually. The second step involved examining the economic feasibility of each alternate that satisfied conceptual requirements. The conceptual analyses of the alternates evaluate their effects on the City of St. Paul and on Dakota County. For the City of St. Paul, the analyses include examinations of the effects of alternates on the City's 1) transportation, 2) environment, 3) business activity centers, and 4) socio-economic structure. Moreover, the analyses include the input of representatives of the City's Central Business District as determined by Mid -Continent Surveys, Inc. , an independent polling organization based in Minneapolis (see Appendix 1 for survey questions and answers). The discussions regarding Dakota County effects are more general in nature because of circumstances. The data evaluated in the conceptual analyses indicate that: 1. Alternate 1 - The Do -Nothing alternate - is unacceptable because it would probably lead to intolerable congestion levels in the City of St. Paul and would deny transportation services to Dakota County, one of the fastest growing counties of the 7-county St. Paul -Minneapolis metropolitan area. 2. Alternate 2 - proposed I-35E in the Pleasant Ave. corridor as currently proposed - represents an acceptable transportation corridor. Nonetheless, it has environmental shortcomings (noise, passes through "sensitive" land use areas, etc. ) and results in the overloading of St. Clair Ave. in St. Paul. In the Consultant's view, this has the undesirable effect of IV - g subjecting this southern extremity of the stable Summit Hill district to pressures which are likely to lead to more intensive land uses. 3. Alternate 3 - proposed I-35E in the Pleasant Ave. corridor with design modifications - is in effect Alt. 2 with design changes recommended to minimize harm. The primary changes from Alt. 2 are the deletion of the St. Clair Ave. ramps; the inclusion of noise abatement structures; and carrying Grand Ave. -Ramsey St. over I-35E instead of the reverse as in Alt. 2. These modifications improve noise exposure, permit St. Clair Ave. to retain its serene setting, and tend to result in aesthetic improvements. 4. Alternate 4 - proposed I-35E in the Shepard Road corridor - is a low priority corridor because it does not attract traffic levels that warrant interstate -standard roadways. In addition, because of natural topographic and man-made physical constraints, it is necessary to construct I-35E as a continuous bridge (2nd-tier viaduct). This represents an unpleasant sight and is likely to hinder development of St. Paul's riverfront area. 5. Alternate 5 - proposed I-35E in the new T. H. 3 corridor via proposed I-494 - abandons the concept of a freeway in the Pleasant Ave. corridor and substitutes a parkway -boulevard terminating at Grand Ave. -Ramsey St. The interstate designation of I-35E shifts to the new T. H. 3 corridor (Lafayette Freeway) in Dakota County. This necessitates the construction of an enlarged East 7th St. - I-94 - T. H. 3 interchange; the deletion of the southerly ramps at the existing Maryland Ave. interchange at I-35E; the upgrading of Shepard Road; the addition of a minimum of 2 lanes to new T. H. 3; and the construction of a connection in Dakota County from I-494 to T. H. 110 in the currently proposed I-35E corridor. Alt. 5 has the probable effect of overloading Shepard Road; of causing congestion in the St. Paul C. B. D. ; of not improving the mobility of St. Paul residents situated to the southwest of the City's C. B. D. ; of dislocating industrial -commercial entities in St. Paul near the East 7th St. - Lafayette Freeway interchange; and of minimizing environmental effects in the Pleasant Ave. corridor with increases in such effects along the T. H. 3 corridor. Alt. 5 involves extensive construction in addition to that for proposed I-35E. Yet, it still fails to provide levels of traffic services comparable to the Pleasant Ave. corridor alternates. However, if the over-riding criterion to consider is to reduce the negative environmental effects in the Pleasant Ave. corridor, the T. H. 3 corridor is the only other possibility, albeit a poorer one. 6. Alternate 6 - proposed I-35E in the T. H. 3 corridor via Dakota County Road 30 - is unacceptable because it does not satisfy even one of the 6 criteria established for evaluating the alternates. IV - h 7. Alternate 7 - Mass transit only - is impossible to evaluate definitively because the Twin Cities area has yet to settle on a mass transit plan that enjoys widespread support. In any event, the indications are that the proposed I-35E corridors are low -priority ones. They are not likely to receive mass transit attention (other than the use of express buses) on freeway lanes. By eliminating Alternates 1, 6 and 7, the conceptual analysis leaves 4 for which additional economic tests may be applied. The method used is to compare costs to benefits. In this connection, costs relate to all project and social costs while benefits quantified are those derived from travel time savings and accident reductions. The cost -benefit analyses indicate that benefits exceed costs in the case of proposed I-35E in the Pleasant Ave. corridor. In Alt. 5 (T. H. 3 corridor), costs exceed benefits by a margin of 2 to 1. In Alt. 4 (Shepard Road corridor), costs exceed benefits by a margin of 4 to 1. From an economics standpoint, the Pleasant Ave. corridor is superior to the others. Estimates of benefits versus costs of the Alternates are: Benefits Costs Alternate 2 $62, 000, 000 $53, 323, 800 Alternate 3 $58, 000, 000 $56, 891, 500 Alternate 4 $28, 600, 000 $135, 000, 000 Alternate 5 $23, 323, 800 $46, 601, 000 Note: Alternate 2 costs exclude items required to minimize environmental harm whereas Alternate 3 includes them. IV -i B. COMMENTS With few exceptions, the possible locations for the construction of a highway are many. With no exceptions, an interstate highway in an urban setting is likely to have negative effects as well as positive ones. In all cases, it is necessary to reduce the "many" to one or two locations with an understanding of the "trade-off" each option entails. In the decision -making process, there is no choice other than to attempt to evaluate as many factors as it is possible to do to arrive at answers resulting in the greatest "public good". To be sure, this is a difficult process. There are social costs and benefits which either defy accurate quantification or which vary wildly in value depending on the respective points of view of the parties involved. Nonetheless, the "imperfect" state of the art does not negate the need to seek logical solutions to problems. The methods used in the evaluation of the 7 Alternates selected for study represent such an application. IV -j 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 i SECTION IV - ALTERNATES AND THEIR EFFECTS A. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE ALTERNATES The Consultants, together with the opponents of proposed I-35E, namely RIP I-35E, identified six (6) primary alternates for study in connection with this Report. In addition, to the extent one can consider "reasonable", this Section includes a mass transit only alternative. It requires emphasizing, however, that the alternates selected for study in this Report came to be as a result of a cursory map examination of the area affected by proposed I-35E. This was because definitive analyses of alternate routings for I-35E on which to base selections intelligently were not available. Specifically, the total of seven alternates and their general descriptions are as follows: - -ALTERNATE 1: Use existing city streets, sell right-of-way already purchased, remove unnecessary bridges and other construction. This is the do-nothing alternate. - -ALTERNATE 2: Complete proposed I-35E exactly as currently designed in the Pleasant Avenue corridor in St. Paul. - -ALTERNATE 3: Complete I-35E in the Pleasant Ave. corridor but with design modifications to reduce the roadway's adverse environmental effects. - -ALTERNATE 4: Complete I-35E to Shepard Road on the north end of the inplace I-35E bridge across the Mississippi River, then construct an elevated second -tier roadway (viaduct) as I-35E along the approximate alignment of Shepard Road to the Railroad yards east of the City of Saint Paul Central Business District and connect to inplace I-35E north of the C. B. D. IV - 1 -ALTERNATE 5: Complete I-35E from its junction with I-35 in Dakota County to I-494, have a "Common" Section with proposed I-494 easterly to its junction with north -south T. H. 3, then continue I-35E along T. H. 3, reconstruct the T. H. 3 inter- change at the north end of the Lafayette Bridge with East 7th St. , and connect to inplace I-35E north of the C. B. D. Also, in St. Paul, improve Shepard Road and construct parkway - boulevard (Randolph Ave. to Grand Ave. ). In Dakota Co., provide link between I-494 and T. H. 110 along currently proposed I-35E corridor. --ALTERNATE 6: Complete I-35E from its junction with 1-35 in Dakota County to east -west Dakota County Road 30 (about 4 miles south of I-494), construct I-35E along Dakota Co. Rd. 30 alignment to the southerly end of proposed T. H. 3, then continue I-35E along T. H. 3, reconstruct the T. H. 3 interchange at the north end of the Lafayette Bridge with East 7th St. , and connect to inplace I-35E north of the C. B. D. --ALTERNATE 7: Use mass transit to meet travel demands proposed I-35E is designed to satisfy. The general locations of Alternates 2 through 6 as superimposed on a portion of a Twin Cities metropolitan area map appear in fig. 35. Alternate 1, the do-nothing alternate, and Alt. 7, the mass transit alternate, are not shown in the figure because 1) Alt. 1 leaves the area as is and 2) Alt. 7 has no definite comprehensive transit proposals associated with it which exclude proposed I-35E entirely. The same alternates depicted in fig. 35 appear in fig. 36 superimposed on a 1968 aerial photograph of northern Dakota County and parts of the City of St. Paul. Because of space limitation, fig. 36 does not include the east -west portion of Alt. 6 along Dakota Co. Rd. No. 30 (Note: Dakota Co. Rd. No. 30 is an east -west road situated about 4 miles to the south of proposed 1-494. ) IV - 2 rerharn BURNSV ILLE PC? IA.993O CIAiR, FORD RKWY MO iREAL �5 tIi,EGUY'..q: Blackh Lak Hurle;c Lv ka MEND( T ,A HEIGHT'S Wescott* '7Yald akv ',rAGAPe Mctarth'r roe �4�ss Lake =i ALT. 6 Thornavt Lake Lakes ,y J u3. APPLE VALLE', POP. 95^2 w L' S I AI i 1 1 ST. PAUL-MINNEAPOLIS METROPOLITAN AREA (Source; Minnesota Department of Highways) Scale of Statute Miles 0 I Figure 35. Location Map for Alternates 2 through 6 IV-3 I TV - 4 From figs. 35 and 36, it is apparent that the 5 alternates that call for the construction of an I-35E someplace involve the use of 3 main transportation corridors in the City of St. Paul. Specifically, they are 1) The currently proposed Pleasant Avenue corridor (Alt. 2, 3), 2) Shepard Road (Alt. 4), and 3) T. H. 3 and its extensions northerly to inplace I-35E (Alt. 5, 6). Similarly, the 5 alternates involve 2 north -south and 2 east -west transpor- tation corridors in Dakota County. The north -south corridors are 1) proposed I-35E "as is" in the western half of the County (Alt. 2, 3, 5); and 2) T. H. 3 along the West St. Paul - South St. Paul limits and its southerly extension (Alt. 5, 6). The east -west corridors are 1) along proposed I-494 (Alt. 5); and 2) along Dakota County Road 30 (Alt. 6). The 5 alternates and their physical characteristics appear in Table IV - 1. In addition, Table IV - 1 includes Alt. 1 for the purpose of pointing out the extent of work already done and the amount of right-of-way already acquired for the construction of proposed I-35E in the Pleasant Ave. corridor. In the event the Do -Nothing alternate (Alt. 1) finally prevails, several structures (e. g. bridges) would require demolition and the rights -of -way would have to be disposed of or transferred to other uses in accordance with applicable statutes. -- The Pleasant Ave. corridor alternates (Alt. 2, 3) represent a total construction length for proposed I-35E of slightly more than nineteen miles (19. 16 mi. ) of which 4. 53 mi. are in Ramsey County. The total length covers the distance from the I-35 junction at the southerly end to a suitable connection point in the I-94 and I-35E junction area at the Capitol Approach Complex in the City of St. Paul. IV - 5 TABLE IV-1 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF PROPOSED 1-35E AND ALTERNATES (1-35 Junction in Dakota County to 1-94 Junction in Ramsey County) Length in Miles Interchanges Lanes Right-o -Way Remarks Number Type 4 I 6 Total Acres Acres per Mile Proposed Total Constructed Total Remaining Mileage Proposed Constructed D CL M Miles ALTERNATE 1 (Do Nothing) Ramsey County Dakota County 0. 00 2. 80 0. 00 0. 87 0. 00 1. 93 ALTERNATE 2 19. 16 (Pleasant Ave. Corridor) Ramsey County 4. 53 Dakota County 14. 63 ALTERNATE 3 19. 16 (Pleasant Ave. Corridor with Design Modifications) Ramsey County 4. 53 Dakota County 14. 63 ALTERNATE 4 (Shepard Road Corridor) Ramsey County Dakota County ALTERNATE 5 (Reroute I-35E at 1-494 Junction to T. H. 3 Corridor) Ramsey County Dakota County Alt. 5 Additions Parkway -Boulevard in Pleasant Ave. Corridor 1-494 to T. H. 110 Connection West 7th St. to Randolph Ave. in Pleasant Ave. Corridor ALTERNATE (Reroute I-35E at Dakota Co. Rd. 30 to new T. H. 3 Extension) Ramsey County Dakota County 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0 0 0 0 2 3/4 1/4 1/2 2.80 16.36 18 4 12 2 3/4 0.87 3.66 7 2 41/4 1/4 1.93 12. 70 11 2 7 3/4 2 1/2 2. 80 1. 14 1. 66 Requires disposing of acquired r/w totalling 110 acres in Ramsey Co. and 228 acres in Dakota Co. 2 10.01 9. 15 1280 66. 8 This is the currently proposed 2 1.49 3. 04 160 35. 3 corridor and 3 8. 52 6. 11 1120 76. 5 design. 2.80 16.36 17 4 11 1/2 2 3/4 2 0. 87 1. 93 21.43 2. 80 6.80 0.87* 14. 63 1. 93 3. 66 12. 70 18. 97 6. 27 12. 70 6 11 10. 01 9. 15 1280 66. 8 2 3 3/4 1/4 2 1.49 3.04 160 35. 3 2 7 3/4 2 1/2 3 8. 52 6. 11 1120 76. 5 13 3 8 1/4 2 11 1 1/2 2 1/4 3 15.32 6. 11 1250 58.2 I 6. 80 130 19.2 2 7 3/4 2 1/4 2 8. 52 6. 11 1120 76. 5 22.49 2.00 20.49 20 18 11 1/4 3 1/4 3 15.20 7.29 1065 3.25 2.00 1. 25 4 2 2 1/2 1/2 1 3.25 19.24 -- -- 16 16 8 3/4 2 3/4 2 15. 20 4. 04 3. 54 2.01 0. 76 0. 77 3. 54 2. 01 0. 76 0. 77 1 1 This is the pro- posed corridor with design modifications to improve environ- mental effects. Of the 130 acres r/w in Ramsey Co. , 35 acres are over existing Shepard Rd. and 65 acres are air rights over inplace rail yards. 47. 3 New section in Ramsey Co. totals 1.25 mi. Common sections with 1-494 165 50. 7 and T. H. 3 total 900 65. 3 7. 76 mi. Share of common section for r/w taken at 20 acres/mi. 1 2. 77 0. 77 120 2. 01 - 65 0.76 - 35 0. 77 20 18.28 2.00 16.28 -- 9 1/2 3 1/2 2 13.70 4.58 1145 3. 25 2. 00 15. 03 -- 1.25 4 2 2 1/2 1/2 1 13 7 3 1 *Includes construction from Shepard Road to West 7th St. 62. 6 3.25 - 85 26. 1 10.45 4. 58 1060 70. 5 Notes: Interchange types are D = Diamond; CL = Cloverleaf; M = Miscellaneous - includes directional and trumpet. Construction in Pleasant Ave. Corridor in Ramsey Co. is generally complete with respect to grading, drainage, bridges, etc. Interchanges are given in fractions to indicate number of movements provided. IV-6 In addition, Alternates 2 and 3 require about 1, 280 acres of right-of-way and involve the construction of 18 and 17 interchanges respectively. In this connection, the term interchange refers to grade separations between proposed I-35E and other roadways where there are connection ramps from one to the other. -- The Shepard Road alternate (Alt. 4) has a total length of about 21. 5 miles (21. 43 mi.) of which 6. 80 mi. are in Ramsey County. However, in this case the 6. 80 mi. involve a different type of construction than the other alternates do because Alt. 4 consists of a second -tier 4-lane roadway (viaduct). In effect, this is the same as a continuous bridge. The connection to inplace I-35E extending northward occurs at a point northeasterly of the Capitol Approach Complex in the City of St. Paul. The Consultant estimates that Alt. 4 requires about 1,250 acres for right-of-way and includes 13 interchanges. Approximately 100 acres of the total are in air rights over existing Shepard Road and the inplace railroad yards that are traversed. The Trunk Highway 3 corridor alternates (Alt. 5, 6) are identical to one another from I-494 northward in that both follow the same alignment along T. H. 3 and across the T. H. 3 bridge (Lafayette Ave. bridge) over the Mississippi River and connect to I-35E at a point northeasterly of the Capitol Approach Complex in the City of St. Paul. However, apart from this similarity, Alternates 5 and 6 are totally different in concept. Alternate 5 includes the construction of I-35E in the originally proposed corridor in Dakota County from the 1-35 - I-35E junction at its southerly end to its interchange area with proposed I-494 to the north. From this point, Alt. 5 consists of rerouting I-35E along the proposed east -west 1-494 alignment to the 1-494 - T. H. 3 interchange area. At this point, I-35E turns northerly along T. H. 3. Moreover, Alt. 5 includes additional roadway construction in both Ramsey and Dakota Counties. In Ramsey Co. , this relates to building a "parkway" or "boulevard" in the Pleasant Ave. corridor utilizing right-of-way already purchased for I-35E construction and terminating at Grand Ave. - Ramsey St. and a connection from inplace I-35E southbound in the Capitol Approach Complex to the Central Business District. In Dakota Co. , this relates to building a high-speed connection from the I-35E - 1-494 interchange area to T. H. 110 in the currently proposed I-35E corridor. (This is about three-quarters of a mile in length. ) Alternate 5 totals about 22. 5 miles (22. 49 mi. ) in length of interstate - IV - 7 standard roadway construction and nearly 4 miles (3. 54 mi. ) in related 4-lane "parkway", and street construction. Of these amounts, about 2. 01 mi. and 0. 77 mi. respectively are in Ramsey County (exclusive of Fifth and Sixth St. connections). For I-35E construction in Alt. 5, the total length extends from its junction with I-35 at the southerly end to a suitable connection point with inplace I-35E northeasterly of the Capitol Approach Complex. Alternate 6 involves construction of I-35E in its originally proposed corridor in Dakota Co. from its junction with I-35 at its southerly end to Dakota Co. Rd. 30 (a distance of 6. 48 mi. ). Then Alt. 6 envisions I-35E rerouted easterly along Dakota Co. Rd. 30 until it reaches a location intersecting with the southerly extension of T. H. 3. Proposed I-35E then turns northerly and follows the T. H. 3 alignment into St. Paul. (Note: From the T. H. 3 - I-494 interchange area northward, Alt. 5 and Alt. 6 are identical. ) The Consultant estimates that right-of-way requirements for Alt. 5 total about 1, 065 acres for interstate roadway construction and an additional 120 acres for related parkway and other roadway construction. Also, there are 23 interchanges in Alt. 5, albeit the majority of them are either inplace or proposed for the construction of other highways. Alternate 6 has a total length of about 18. 3 miles (18. 28 mi. ), of which 3. 25 miles are in Ramsey County. The total length covers the distance of I-35E from its junction with I-35 at its southerly end to a suitable connection point with inplace I-35E northeasterly of the Capitol Approach Complex. The Consultant estimates that right-of-way requirements for Alt. 6 total about 1, 145 acres and will involve 17 interchanges. IV-8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 B. CRITERIA USED IN THE EVALUATION OF ALTERNATES The necessity to apply a well-defined set of criteria and standards of measurement in the evaluation of the Alternate schemes is self-evident. In this respect, the Consultants established the following primary requirements that the Alternates should satisfy. Specifically, these requirements are: 1. An Alternate shall be able to function as a transportation facility. In other words, this says that each of the Alternate plans should serve travel needs by attracting traffic. The premise for this statement is that it is senseless to construct a transportation facility which will not be used. 2. An Alternate shall be in "general" conformance with transportation plans developed by responsible Planning Agencies in the St. Paul -Minneapolis Metropolitan Area and be consistent with development objectives. This suggests that each of the Alternate plans should be compatible with the area's trans- portation system and should serve to foster orderly area development. 3. An Alternate shall generate a positive rate of return on public investment. In effect, this says that each alternate should be able to stand on its own financially (to the greatest extent possible). 4. An Alternate shall include a Connection from the junction of proposed I-494 and proposed I-35E in Dakota County to the inplace I-35E - T.H. 110 junction located about 3/4 miles to the north. This requirement recognizes that all of the "construct" I-35E Alternates except one (Alt. 6) feature I-35E construction from 1-35 up to its junction with proposed I-494. Hence it IV - 9 1 follows that a short stretch of roadway between I-494 and T. H. 110 would mean that two high-speed highways to bridges (I-35E bridge and Lafayette Bridge on T. H. 3) across the Mississippi River instead of one would be available. 5. An Alternate shall, to the greatest extent possible, include a connection to the City of Saint Paul's Short Line Road serving the Midway district . This relates to the fact that the purpose of the Short Line Road was to provide access to and from the City's Midway district, which contains industrial, commercial, and trucking concerns. In this connection, proposed I-35E at least up to its junction with the Short Line Road near Randolph Ave. was a given. Without an I-35E connection to the Short Line Road, the Short Line is and will remain an ineffective and little -used roadway. 6. An Alternate's effects on the environment shall result in as minimal harm as possible. It is unlikely that any project of the magnitude of proposed I-35E can be constructed without some negative effects on the environment. However, it requires noting that there are environmental requirements which new highways have to satisfy. 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 IV - 10 It is the Consultant's opinion that the foregoing 6 criteria provide a basis for determining how each Alternate measures up conceptually. Upon detailed analysis, if any of the Alternates fail demonstrably with respect to concept, the Consultant's view was that it could be dropped from further consideration. The fact that a cursory map examination was the basis for selecting some of the Alternates for study made it important to validate whether the choices were sound ones. If there were any that were not, then dropping such Alternates from further consideration would be justified. In commenting on the selection of the 6 criteria, the Consultant notes that the items are similar to basic criteria generally used in transportation planning. The primary differences are that the wording applies specifically to the I-35E case as indicated below. The first criterion is a self-explanatory one which simply states that constructing a facility which will not get used is not reasonable. The second criterion relates to the fact that the development objectives of a metropolitan area and the transportation systems associated with them are interrelated. This is a basic element of the transportation planning process. In effect, it points out that planning agencies should work toward common objectives and to do otherwise would be counter -productive. Criterion 3 is a basic tenet of nearly all public and private expenditures. IV - 11 Excepting subsidy programs, one of the standards of measurement applied to projects is whether they will generate a positive rate of return. In this connection, it requires noting that a positive rate of return factor does not imply money only. It could also mean other forms of benefits much in the way that education is evaluated. Criterion 4 was included because of the data given in Section I. Reference to Section I reveals that projected development for the westerly half of Dakota County results in a travel demand function that translates into a need for additional transportation facilities. Similarly, criterion 4 is a way of recognizing that substantial amounts of construction on I-35E have occurred and that if it is possible to make use of the earlier work, it is sensible to do so. Criterion 5 is really a subset of criterion 2 in that it relates to the general transportation system proposed for the St. Paul - Minneapolis metropolitan area. Recalling data given earlier in Section I, the purpose of the Short Line Road was to serve as a primary connection between proposed I-35E and the Midway district. (The Midway district is a commercial -industrial activity center in the City of St. Paul.) A considerable portion of the Short Line Road is already open to traffic. Criterion 6 relates to the desire that projects of any sort not harm the environment. This is not to say that all environmental harm can be avoided in the case of major projects. Rather, it is to require that the negative 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IV - 12 1 effects of a project on the environment be minimized to the greatest extent possible if the public good warrants the implementation of the project. The foregoing review of the criteria reveals that the first 5 are associated with transportation and/or development factors whilc Criteria 6 relates to the environment. In the Consultant's opinion, the order of presentation of the transportation - related criteria tends to reflect the relative importance of the items. As for Criterion 6, it is an essentially independent factor. IV - 13 C. ANALYSES OF ALTERNATES An analysis of each of the 7 Alternates described earlier follows. The purpose of the analyses is to determine their specific strengths and weak- nesses. In each analysis except that of Alt. 7, the presentation consists of identifying the Alternate's effects on the City of St. Paul and on Dakota County separately. However, for the Alt. 7 (Mass Transit) analysis, it was necessary to limit the discussion to more general terms. The analyses attempt to evaluate how each Alternate affects the area's general needs regarding transportation, environment and business activity centers. In addition, the analyses include discussions about the respective social costs involved. Because the Alternates selected for study in this Report were the result of a cursory map examination, it is the view here that the analyses which follow will provide a means of determining whether some of the Alternates should be dropped from further consideration. IV - 14 1. ALTERNATE I - THE DO-NOTHING ALTERNATE The first alternate that requires analysis is the "Do -Nothing" Alternate. In effect, this alternate entails stopping any and all construction on proposed I-35E in its last remaining segment in Ramsey Co. as well as on its remaining sections in Dakota County. Following that, it involves disposing of land already acquired and deleting I-35E from any consideration whatsoever in terms of the Twin Cities metropolitan area transportation network. Moreover, it renders $33, 600, 000 already expended on I-35E for engineering, right-of-way, and construction almost useless (in 1972 dollars, the value would exceed $37 millions). The federal share of this sum is 90% or $30, 240, 000. In Ramsey County, the link from West 7th St. to the I-94 junction has cost $23, 600, 000 in actual dollars (over $26 millions in 1972 dollars. ) These ex- penditures, that date back to the late 1950's were for engineering, right-of-way acquisition, construction in the form of bridges, drainage systems, appurtenant city street construction (i. e. Victoria St. to Pleasant Ave. connection), utility relocations, and miscellaneous items. In the event of a do-nothing alternate, the main recoverable item is land, which totals about 109 acres in the proposed I-35E link. Assuming it is possible to resell it and assuming a comparable land use (residential) as was the case at the time of the land purchase, the amount recoverable should range between $3, 300, 000 and $5, 500, 000. This correlates to costs per acre in the IV - 15 $30, 000 to $50, 000 category. Even then, these figures may be optimistic in light of the fact that about 20% to 25% of the total customarily goes for streets, alleys, and other public rights -of -way. Considering that $21, 240, 000 of the $23, 600, 000 already spent was the federal share of expenditures, the State of Minnesota faces the possibility of having to return or being charged for an estimated amount of between $15, 000, 000 and $18, 000, 000, exclusive of land sale revenues. The disposal of lands can occur in one of 3 ways. State of Minnesota statutes provide that the acquired right-of-way can: 1) Be offered by the State to the original parties from whom the properties were originally purchased. 2) Be put up for auction if the original owners do not wish to repurchase any or all of their properties. 3) Be sold by the Commissioner of Highways to another public agency for public use. It is possible that a different kind of public use could be that of a "new town" within the City that incorporates mixed forms of housing and green areas. However, whether this could or would occur and what timetable could be followed would be purely speculative and is beyond the scope of this Report. The above considerations relate to what would happen should a do-nothing alternate be adopted. They do not address the issue of whether such an alternate is a reasonable one. IV - 16 The do-nothing alternate affects both the City of Saint Paul and Dakota County, albeit in different ways. Thus, it requires evaluating the effects of the Alternate individually as well as collectively from a geographical stand- point to estimate its total impact on the metropolitan area. a. CITY OF SAINT PAUL EFFECTS Transportation. In this respect, the main question is "What is the capab- ility of the City's existing transportation system in the proposed I-35E project area". If the existing system can accommodate projected future travel, then at least the City of St. Paul can withstand a "no -build" condition. In this connection, fig. 37 gives estimates of travel for 1985 in the project area under a do-nothing alternate. (Fig. 37 is a reduced scale version of fig. 24. ) Reference to fig. 37 calls attention to the following 1985 travel projections: Figure 37. Reprint of Figure 24-Travel Forecasts for 1985- Alt! 1) Shepard Road - 35, 700 to 40, 200 vehicles per day 2) Lexington Pkwy. - 23, 500 to 25, 500 vehicles per day 3) West 7th Street - 1, 000 to 23,200 vehicles per day With respect to traffic, the main problem areas are on Shepard Road and on Lexington Parkway. As stated in Section I (p. I-63), these projections represent over double their actual 1971 - 1972 traffic loads. In the case of IV - 17 West 7th St. , the 1985 projections are about 70% over its actual 1971-1972 traffic figures. The estimated capacities of Shepard Road, Lexington Parkway and West 7th St. are about 24,000, 22, 000 and 14, 000 vehicles per day respectively. Thus, it is reasonable to state that the existing primary north -south roadways will not be able to satisfy the expected 1985 travel demands. Environment If the foregoing traffic projections materialize, the effects on the environment in the City will reflect themselves in 1) increased levels of traffic congestion, 2) higher accident rates and 3) greater use of residential streets which is likely to cause greater air and noise pollution. Moreover, increased levels of traffic activity on residential streets because of a spillover from overloaded arterial streets are likely to affect gradual changes in land use away from a residential character. In short, the effects on the environment of the do-nothing alternate are likely to be negative ones. Business Activity Centers. The discussion in Section I of this Report dealt at length with the probability that the City of St. Paul's role within the Twin Cities Metropolitan Community would decline if accessibility to its business activity centers lagged behind competing centers. In this event, private sector employment would probably suffer as business activity softened with respect to that of the metropolitan area. Public sector employment is not likely to be affected because as the Capitol City, St. Paul benefits from being a government center. IV - 18 With the do-nothing alternate, the likelihood is that the metropolitan area's business activity centers will shift away from the City of St. Paul. This development would probably result in greater activity for Minneapolis and for business activity centers in the westerly half of the metropolitan area, which would enjoy a marked advantage in accessibility. Social Costs. The social costs associated with the Do -Nothing Alternate are difficult to quantify. However, in general tern -is, traffic congestion, traffic overflow from crowded arterial streets into residential areas, and probable declines in business activities in the City represent a cost to St. Paul residents. In addition, the traffic data suggest that the City would have to upgrade several arterial streets to accommodate projected increases. Thus, accepting the Do -Nothing Alternate at this time (1973) will only delay rather than eliminate the absolute need for improved transportation facilities. IV - 19 b. DAKOTA COUNTY EFFECTS At the very outset, it requires emphasizing that Dakota County is already in the process of urbanization. It is one of the two fastest growing counties in the 7-county Saint Paul - Minneapolis metropolitan area. Investments, public and private, have already been made. In many instances, these investments are irreversible (i. e. sewer systems, utilities, housing, highways, etc. ) To its advantage, Dakota County has had the good fortune of being able to apply the planning process to the development of "raw" land. Under such circumstances, setting the locations of the primary transportation routes is near -critical. In this connection, the location of I-35E within the County has been fixed and used as "given" for at least the last 10 years. A major factor in Dakota County's development, or lack of it, in its westerly half has been the limited number of transportation facilities available in the area. In this respect, proposed I-35E represents the primary north - south transportation route connecting western Dakota Co. to the City of Saint Paul and beyond, or vice versa. The foregoing indicates that Dakota County's reliance on proposed I-35E is a major one. In fact, to state that a do-nothing alternate with respect to I-35E would cause severe difficulties in the County would probably be an understatement. IV - 20 c. CONCLUSION By any standard of measurement, the do-nothing alternate fails and is unacceptable. The reasons for this statement are as follows: 1) It would overload the existing City of Saint Paul street network in the area southwest of the Central Business District and would probably lead to intolerable congestion levels. 2) It would place the City of Saint Paul and the easterly counties of the metropolitan area at a serious disadvantage because of lack of access to their major activity centers. 3) It would hinder the full realization of the Saint Paul C. B. D. employment potential. 4) It would deny high-speed travel service to one of the fastest growing segments of the metropolitan community (western half of northern Dakota County). 5) It would waste or render ineffective the planning work done in connection with the County's "planned urbanization" process in Dakota County over the last 10 years. 6) It would seriously jeopardize the realization of a return on invest- ments and capital expenditures in Dakota County, whether they be public or private, made on the basis that I-35E would be constructed. 7) It would hinder access to the new regional zoo in Apple Valley in Dakota County. 8) It would remove a major link of the basic freeway network designed to serve the Twin Cities area. 9) It would make Saint Paul's Short Line Road useless (for all practical purposes) as a major transportation facility. IV - 21 2. ALTERNATE 2 - COMPLETE I-35E IN PROPOSED PLEASANT AVENUE CORRIDOR AS CURRENTLY DESIGNED Of the alternates that call for the construction of an I-35E in the Twin City metropolitan area, Alternate 2 is the one on which design, right-of-way acquisition, and construction are the most complete. This is because, from the very outset, the City of St. Paul, the State of Minnesota, and the Bureau of Public Roads (predecessor to the Federal Highway Administration) concurred in the selection of the "Pleasant Ave. " corridor in the City for the construction of I-35E. Data presented in SECTION I (p. I - 85) of this Report remind one that $23, 600, 000 of the estimated $52-million project costs have been expended on the I-35E link from West 7th St. to the I-94 Junction within the City of St. Paul. The work completed includes 10 of 19 bridges, about 75% of the total grading, 2 sewer tunnels for drainage, slope stability structures, and nearly 100% of the right-of-way acquisitions. In addition to the work noted in the preceding paragraph on the link from West 7th St. to the I-94 Junction, construction on I-35E is complete and the roadway is open to traffic from West 7th St. southerly to its junction with T. H 110 in Dakota County. The length of this stretch of I-35E is about 2.8 miles and it includes the I-35E bridge over the Mississippi River, and interchanges at 1) West 7th St. , 2) Shepard Road, 3) T. H. 13, and 4) T. H. 110. (The latter two are in Dakota County.) Expenditures on this IV - 22 stretch have totalled $11, 000, 000 (actual cost), which represent over $13-million in 1972 dollars. SECTIONS I and II of this Report describe and look into the probable environmental effects of this Alternate as they apply to the link from West 7th St. to the I-94 Junction in St. Paul. SECTIONS I and II do not deal with the Dakota County portion of this Alternate. Because of the details given in SECTIONS I and II, there will be no attempt to repeat all the details here. The aforementioned two sections 1) identified project costs, 2) identified and quantified transportation benefits and 3) identi- fied social costs, without quantification. This quantification appears hereafter in this Section. IV - 23 a. CITY OF SAINT PAUL EFFECTS Transportation. Summarizing data given in SECTION I, it is possible to state the following about the proposed I-35E link between West 7th St. and the I-94 Junction at the Capitol Approach Complex. 1) It will relieve traffic on the primary north -south routes in the project area. Specifically, these routes are Lexington Parkway, West 7th St. , and Shepard Road. 2) It will provide a connection to the City's Short Line Road in the vicinity of Randolph Ave. 3 It will increase travel on parts of the east -west arterial streets interchanging with I-35E. This situation is most noticeable along Randolph Ave. between Hamline Ave. and I-35E; and along St. Clair Ave. between Lexington Parkway and I-35E. 4) It will necessitate design modifications in the Capitol Approach Complex, where it joins I-94. This is because the current design, which was based on 1975 travel figures (by law), requires changes in order to function acceptably. 5) It will improve ease of access to the metropolitan area's activity centers for residents in the 50, 000-plus population area to the southwest of the City's Central Business District (C. B. D. ). 6) It will serve between 60, 000 and 75, 000 vehicles per day, at least 70% - 75% of which would probably have to use City streets and/or other means for travel. (Note: The projections are based on pre -energy crisis data. The exact effects of the current gasoline shortage on the projections are impossible to determine at this point. ) For purposes of convenience, fig. 25, which in SECTION I gives estimates of travel for 1985 in the project area for this alternate, is repeated in reduced scale as fig. 38. IV - 24 ,) (lI 9) (17f9 (122) (13.01 (14"IiiMPLfi E e (10.7) = • 15.9) 113.0 ISO) (12 7) ` «i//// / ti (21e) 12. 61 (11 ) SWUM RYE. /OLull) J GRAND Wt.\ (1161 (147) (19.2 (16-9) El (17.91 (11 3) /311✓/ 04> 11) (264) /(10.21 IT. CLAIR AYE. _ - S _ ilL // (70) (27) �. YFRER50R AVE. 1)21 5)P„ (231) (30. 6 /� (Il. .11 (13) 12 31 11 7] ( S RANGDLPO AYF PI •, S\ ( 1 AVERAGE DAILY TRAVEL IN 1000 VEHICLES PER DAY SCALE HI FEET IRGG 0 6000 7300 Figure 38. Reprint of Figure 25 -Travel Forecasts for 1985 -Alt. 2 East - West Reference to fig. 38 high- lights the transportation items referred to above. In this connection, the most signi- ficant projections are probably the following: North - South Lexington Parkway - 7, 400 to 14, 600 vehicles per day West 7th Street - 13, 700 to 15,200 vehicles per day Shepard Road - 13, 700 to 15, 200 vehicles per day Randolph Ave. - (Hamline Ave. to Lexington Pkwy.) 23, 100 vehicles per day St. Clair Ave. - (Lexington Pkwy. to I-35E) 17, 900 to 26, 400 vehicles per day In contrast to the situation under the do-nothing alternate where the 1985 travel projections exceeded the capacities of the 3 north -south streets (Lexington Pkwy. , West 7th St. , and Shepard Road), the projections for 1985 given in fig. 38 indicate that travel on these streets would be at or below their capacities. In fact, the projections indicate that West 7th St. would cease to function as a major arterial street. On the other hand, the 1985 projections for travel on St. Clair Ave. and IV - 25 Randolph Ave. show that they would exceed their approximate capacities of 14, 000 vehicles per day considerably. In this connection, the situation on Randolph Ave. is acceptable, while on St. Clair Ave. , it is not. The premises for the foregoing statement relate to the land uses (zoning) along each street. Reference to the zoning map of the project area (fig. 11) in Section I of this Report illustrates that along Randolph Ave. , the land is zoned almost entirely as "commercial". Thus, Randolph Ave. is likely to emerge as a major arterial street anyway unless drastic changes in develop- ment patterns occur. Therefore, although proposed I-35E would necessitate changes on Randolph Ave. , this should not be construed as a major disadvantage. The circumstances on St. Clair Ave. are markedly different. First, zoning along St. Clair Ave. between Lexington Parkway and its interchange with I-35E is "residential". Second, this stretch includes Linwood Park, a "passive" park on the bluff. Third, St. Clair Ave. at this location represents the southern extremity of the stable Summit hill district, which the 1973 Minnesota State Legislature designated as a historic hill district. On all counts, projections of 17, 900 to 26, 400 vehicles per day are inconsistent with the land use characteristics in the area. Should such projec- tions materialize, they 1) would require widening St. Clair Ave. and 2) would most probably force a shift from the area's relatively serene residential setting to one featuring a more intensive land use. On the basis of the fore- going, it is the Consultant's opinion that it is not desirable to subject this IV - 26 1 1 1 1 area to such pressures. The Environment. Section II of this Report outlines the probable effects of proposed I-35E on the environment in the West 7th St. - I-94 Junction link. From the discussions presented in Section II, the following points are pertinent: 1) Noise is the most critical environmental factor in the project area. Approximately 188 buildings (homes, hospitals, institutions, etc. ) will be exposed to noise levels in excess of the design maximum of 70 decibels on the A -weighted scale (1, 000 vibrations per second). With respect to noise, Table II-2 (see page II - 16) shows that the major problem areas on the link are from Victoria St. to Kellogg Blvd. (segments 4, 5, and 6). Moreover, within this stretch, the St. Clair Ave. to Kellogg Blvd. (segments 5 and 6) portion probably includes the most noise -sensitive facilities (i. e. high value homes and medical care institutions). 2) Vibration is an environmental factor which is important in the Grand Ave. - Ramsey St. to Kellogg Blvd. segment (segment 6) of the link. This is because of the presence of 2 hospitals and 2 extended care facilities within close proximity of proposed I-35E. 3) Neighborhood Disruption and Displacement of Families and Businesses in the Pleasant Ave. Corridor is a thing of the past. Right-of-way acquisitions and land clearing has been nearly complete for several years. (Note: There are 7 residences at Pleasant Ave. and St. Clair Ave. on the "bluff" side of proposed I-35E which are subject to high noise levels and slope stability problems that are likely to be taken. ) 4) The bluff community, in part, represents a high -income citizenry. Data in Section I (page I - 23) noted that 50% of the families in Census Tract 358 on the bluff had mean incomes of $35, 241 per year or more according to the 1970 Census. The assumption here is that the City of Saint Paul would be a loser in human resources and in pro- perty tax declines if these families were to move away from the City. The extent to which an exodus of high -income families from the area would occur if proposed I-35E is constructed is impossible to deter- mine. It is the Consultant's opinion that a mass exodus would not occur because the area's positive characteristics are likely to IV - 27 overcome most of the negative factors proposed I-35E may cause. 5) Erosion in Property Values for residential properties fronting on freeways is a reality. This reduction in values has ranged from 8% to 15%. However, the expectation is that in areas with high -amenity factors and high -value homes, the decline could be in the 20% to 30% category. In the case of I-35E, the property value situation is mixed. On the one hand, there are the residential properties that can be expected to have a relative loss in value. On the other hand, there are the non-residential properties which are likely to benefit from the highway. 6) The historic hill district on the bluff is a new development as far as the Pleasant Ave. corridor for I-35E is concerned. Action by the 1973 Minnesota State Legislature designating a majority of the bluff area as a historic hill district trails the selection of the corridor by about 2 decades. Nonetheless, the designation of the district and the presence of the Hill House and the Burbank -Livingston -Griggs House, which are listed in The National Register of Historic Places, within the district's boundaries have added to the role that the historic factors play in the area. It requires repeating, however, that the Legislative Action designating the historic hill district also is explicit in that it states that the designation is not to interfere with the proposed construction of I-35E. (Note: Reference to Section II (page II - 56) points to the Consul- tant's opinion that the German Presbyterian Bethlehem Church at 311 Ramsey St. and designed by the prominent Minnesota Architect Cass Gilbert in 1890 should be preserved under any Alternate. ) Business Activity Centers. Data presented in Section I and in Appendix I indicate that, in the St. Paul Central Business District (C. B. D. ), the leading activity center, the majority of the persons in leadership positions interviewed by an independent polling organization, in March of 1973, favored the Pleasant Ave. corridor by about 2 to 1 over competing corridors (i. e. Shepard Road and T. H. 3 corridors) for I-35E construction. The polling organization was thc: respected MID-CONTINENT SURVEYS, Inc. , Midwest Plaza Bldg. , Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402. IV - 28 In general, the survey suggests that the area's leaders consider it important that there be good access to and from this and other activity centers in Saint Paul. In practical terms, this translates into a desire to maintain and improve the attractiveness of City of St. Paul activity centers so that the vitality of the centers continue. Specifically, it means that the City's business activity centers would benefit considerably if the residents of rapidly developing Dakota County orient towards St. Paul activity centers. Social Costs. A measure of social costs is the capitalized value of losses in property values. In this connection, the method used was to count the number of dwellings subjected to high noise levels (over 70 dBA); apply values given in the block statistics of the 1970 U.S. Census; and assign property value loss percentages. There are 44 houses on the "bluff" and 144 houses on the "flats" along proposed I-35E in the Pleasant Ave. Corridor, which are subject to noise levels of 70 dBA or more. The 1970 Census data indicate that the values of the "flats" houses ranged between $11, 300 and $16, 500. The "bluff" houses averaged about $55, 000 per dwelling. The total value of the 44 "bluff" homes is $2, 420, 000. In comparison, the 144 "flats" houses total $1, 888, 000 in value. The social loss to the community in dollars is a function of two factors. IV - 29 The first is the immediate loss in property values and the second is the loss in tax revenues such declines in property values would bring about. In this connection, the Consultant has assigned loss factors of 25% and 10% respec- tively for the "bluff" and "flats" properties. The tax rate for residential properties has hovered at about 3% to 3. 5% of market value in St. Paul for some 10 years (See Table I - 13). Table IV - 2 summarizes the Social Cost computation procedure used. As the table indicates, the capitalization of the possible losses in residential property values caused by I-35E totals about $793, 800. The application of a 3. 25% tax factor to this sum results in losses of tax revenues to the City of about $26, 500 per year. (No discount rate applied. ) TABLE IV - 2 ESTIMATED SOCIAL COSTS FOR ALTERNATE 2 IN PLEASANT AVE. CORRIDOR West Seventh St. to Capitol Approach Complex Number of Homes Total Value Market Value Loss Factor 44 rri Bluff $2, 420, 000 25% 144 in Flats $1, 888, 000 10% Sums: $4, 308, 000 Annual Tax Losses to the City: $793, 800 x 3. 25% = $26, 500 (No discount rate) 20-year Tax Losses = $530, 000 Value Loss $605, 000 $188, 000 $793, 800 IV - 30 At this point, it is important to understand that although Table IV - 2 implies that the effects of proposed I-35E on property values are totally negative, this is not the case. The City of Saint Paul is undergoing dynamic changes. In this connection, it is likely that the "flats" areas between the location of the Civic Center and St. Clair Ave. will have a more intensive land use (i. e. town houses, apart- ments, etc. ) than is currently the case. Thus, the revenue gained from such facilities could offset, if not surpass, the losses shown in Table IV - 2. The only reason that it is impossible to quantify such a development is because there would be no reliable way of assigning values and timetables to it. IV - 31 b . DAKOTA COUNTY EFFECTS By and large, the effects of proposed I-35E on Dakota County are positive. From the outset of the planning process in the County, I-35E has represented a "fixed" reference line. In effect, proposed I-35E is one of the major transportation routes which has allowed the planned urbanization of the westerly half of Dakota County. The construction of proposed I-35E in accordance with Alternate 2 gives Dakota County a major link to the rest of the eastern metropolitan community. It results in a reasonably self-contained roadway which has T. H. 110 as a major terminus on the south and the City of Duluth, Minnesota to the north. An Environmental Impact Statement for proposed I-35E from T. H. 110 to the I-35E junction with I-35 to the south is currently being prepared. However, the West 7th St. to the I-94 Junction Link in St. Paul should not be considered totally dependent on that EIS because of its relative indepen- dence and self -containment. In short, with respect to Dakota County, the construction of proposed I-35E would alleviate all the negative factors that are outlined under "Dakota County Effects" in the Alternate 1 discussion (see page IV - 20). IV - 32 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 c. CONCLUSION The proposed link for I-35E between West 7th St. and the I-94 Junction at the Capitol Approach Complex represents a legitimate transportation corridor. In this connection, its effects are: 1. It would relieve traffic on the north -south streets in the area southwest of the City of Saint Paul's Central Business District. 2. It would overload the east -west streets of St. Clair Ave. from Lexington Pkwy. and Randolph Ave. from Hamline Ave. to their junctions with proposed I-35E. 3. It would subject about 188 dwellings and noise -sensitive medical care facilities along the Link to noise levels in excess of 70 decibels on the A -scale which is the established design limit. 4. It would possibly subject the segment between Grand Ave. - Ramsey St. and Kellogg Boulevard to vibration levels in excess of existing levels. 5. It would permit Dakota County to continue its development as planned. 6. It would retain a major link of the basic freeway network designed to serve the Twin Cities area. 7. It would permit Saint Paul's Short Line Road to function as a major transportation facility. 8. It would satisfy the 5 criteria established for the evaluation of the Alternates with respect to transportation objectives (See Criteria 1 - 5). 9. It would fall short of completely satisfying environmental requirements (Criterion 6). 1 IV - 33 3. ALTERNATE 3 - COMPLETE I-35E IN PROPOSED PLEASANT AVENUE CORRIDOR BUT WITH DESIGN MODIFICATIONS Reference to the descriptions of the Alternates given at the beginning of Section IV reveals that Alternate 3 makes use of the Pleasant Ave. corridor for proposed I-35E construction just as Alt. 2 does. Its major difference is that Alt. 3 includes design modifications for the purpose of minimizing environmental harm noted in connection with Alt. 2. In effect, Alt. 3 is a modified version of Alt. 2. The preceding discussion on Alt. 2 indicated that the most objectionable environmental effects of the Alternate relate to noise, vibration, and excessive traffic induced on St. Clair Ave. The design modifications proposed by the Consultant apply to the City of St. Paul portion of the Alternate. In Dakota County, Alternates 2 and 3 are identical. IV - 34 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 a a. CITY OF ST. PAUL EFFECTS Transportation. The discussion on Alternate 2 (see page IV - 25) pointed out the Consultant's opinion that proposed I-35E would overload St. Clair Ave. between Lexington Parkway and its junction with proposed I-35E. On Alternate 2, travel projections for 1985 on St. Clair Ave. range from 17, 900 vehicles per day to 26, 400 vehicles per day (see fig. 38). These traffic volumes are markedly higher than the approximately 12, 000 - 14, 000 vehicles per day capacity St. Clair Ave. can be expected to carry in its present form. Because of its relatively serene setting, it was the Consultant's opinion that the overload conditions on St. Clair Ave. are not desirable. It is fact that the reason St. Clair Ave. overloads at the above -mentioned location is the presence of a half -diamond interchange at its interchange with proposed I-35E. The interchange consists of 1) a ramp from St. Clair Ave. to northbound I-35E and 2) a ramp from southbound I-35E to St. Clair Ave. The design modification explored in connection with reducing travel on St. Clair Ave. was the deletion of the 2 ramps connecting on to I-35E. The resultant shifts in expected travel on proposed I-35E and St. Clair Ave. appear in fig. 39. As fig. 39 illustrates, the traffic load on St. Clair projects at 11, 000 vehicles per day for 1985 in the same location where the forecasts were for 1 IV - 35 over 20, 000 vehicles per day in Alternate 2. Moreover, the expected travel on West 7th Street climbs from 4, 300 vehicles per day to about 11, 200 vehicles per day between the St. Clair Avenue and Grand Avenue intersections. Both developments appear desirable and worth implementing in that they allow the continued use of city streets without modifications. In turn, there is an average reduction of travel on I-35E of about 14, 000 - 15, 000 vehicles per day in the St. Clair Avenue to Kellogg Boulevard segments of proposed I-35E. The reduction in travel on proposed I-35E caused by the elimination of the 2 St. Clair ramps corresponds to a reduction of about 8,000,000 vehicle miles per year. On the basis of a 25 mph speed arterial street and a 45 mph freeway travel speed, there is a loss of about 142, 000 vehicle hours per year which translates into a cost of about $360, 000 per year ($2. 55 per vehicle hour used). Apart from the traffic changes it causes in Alt. 3, it is the Consultant's opinion that the deletion of the St. Clair Ave. ramps permits landscaping in the acquired right-of-way. Otherwise the transportation effects of Alt. 3 on the City of St. Paul transportation system are similar to those of Alt. 2. IV - 36 OM it I - - - ! i - M r IIIIIII OW - AR SHALL AVE. SUMMIT AVE. GRAND AVE. ;SE CLAIF'E JEFFERSON AVE. ANDOLPH A s.; z z N tO (I1 0) 1600 ( )AVERAGE DAILY TRAVEL IN 1000 VEHICLES PER DAY SCALE IN FEET 0 1600 3200 3 Figure 39. Travel Forecasts for 1985- Alt. 3 Environment. In the Consultant's opinion, the deletion of the ramps at St. Clair Ave. is, in part, a positive environmental effect. The premise for this statement is that preserving the serenity of the neighborhood near Linwood Park along St. Clair Ave. is desirable. With respect to other environmental factors, noise and vibration rank high in importance. Specifically, the noise problem is at its most severe along I-35E from Victoria St. to Kellogg Blvd. Vibration is an important consideration in the vicinity of the hospitals between Grand Ave. - Ramsey St. and Kellogg Blvd. Modifications for Noise Reference to Section II of this Report reveals that it is not feasible to shield dwellings subject to 70 dBA or higher noise levels in the segment between Victoria St. and St. Clair Ave. (Segment 4). In the segment from St. Clair Ave. and Grand Ave. - Ramsey St. (Segment 5) it appears that a noise abatement wall along Pleasant Ave. on the bluff side of I-35E can reduce noise exposure at 10 bluff homes by 2 dBA to 5 dBA. In the segment from Grand Ave. - Ramsey St. to Kellogg Blvd. (Segment 6, the noise - sensitive St. Luke's Division of United Hospitals is impossible to shield (upper floors) by normal -sized walls (10 ft. - 25 ft. high). Children's Hospital on the opposite side of proposed I-35E also has high noise exposure on its upper floors. IV - 38 In the case of noise in Segment 5, the likely removal of 7 residences along Pleasant will aid the noise situation for the "bluff" area residences in the Kenwood Circle and Crocus Place locations. This is because the removal of the houses will permit the construction of 20 ft. - 25 ft. high noise abatement wall along the south side of Pleasant Ave. In addition, the triangular strip the residences occupy can then be used for planting trees. The combination has the potential of reducing the noise levels at the 2nd stories of houses by 2 dBA and 5 dBA. In the case of noise in Segment 6, 2 possibilities present themselves as remedial measures. First, the existence of walls on either side of proposed I-35E for grade separations between frontage roads and the main lanes of I-35E suggest covering the main lanes in this area. Second, the potential of reducing noise near the Grand Avenue - Ramsey Street interchange area emerges with a grade change at the interchange. The design of a covered roadway is a function of ventilation constraints. Minnesota Highway Department experience suggests that a length of about 300 ft. is a practical limit for covered sections with "natural" ventilation (i. e. no mechanical equipment). Accordingly, the first alternative in this regard is the placement of two 300 ft. long covered sections - one each in front of Children's Hospital - Lindsay School and St. Luke's Hospital. This scheme incorporates an open section of about 150 ft. in length in the vicinity of Sherman Street. IV - 39 1 1 The covered sections would have sound -absorbent lining on the order of perforated mineral fiber panels to reduce noise. Also, the tops of the covered sections would be restricted to green space use between each side of the proposed freeway. In this connection, the existing geometrics and logic led the Consultant to suggest that the design of this section include provisions for covering the open space in between the two green areas if it should become a necessity. In fact, provisions for extending such a cover section for about 150 ft. on each end as well should receive consideration. If Grand Avenue - Ramsey Street, is carried over I-35E instead of the other way around as proposed in Alt. 2, the 3. 0% mainline grades on each side of the Alt. 2 bridge would flatten to grades of 1. 5% or less (this should reduce noise on the main lanes). The change from I-35E over Grand Ave. - Ramsey St. to under has the added benefit that deceleration and acceleration ramps would go uphill and downhill respectively, a desirable feature. Physically, the change involves lowering the main lane elevations by about 23 ft. (from about elev. 810 to elev. 787). In this configuration, Grand Ave. - Ramsey St. would be elevated while proposed I-35E would be at or near currently existing grade at the Grand Ave. - Ramsey St. - Pleasant Ave. intersections. To be sure, this change involves costs and other considerations. For 1 IV - 40 example, it requires extending right-of-way acquisitions on the west 7th Street side of I-35E by about 100 ft. to 300 ft. depending on final design parameters adopted. Also, it flattens out the steep Rams ey Hill at its lower end, which should be beneficial. The major casualty of this design change is the Cass Gilbert Church building referred to in the Historic Sites treatise in SECTION II of this report. The recommendation here is to move the building and/or to rebuild it at a location in the city which would feature a complex of historic buildings worth preserving. It would appear that the existing grade on the Ramsey Hill could be reached in the vicinity of elevation 810 ft. to 815 ft. This occurs near the low -ends of a series of stone -faced multiple -family dwelling units on the north side of the street. On the south side of the street, this entails the removal of a service station at the base of the Grand Avenue hill. The acquisition of 2 more dwellings on the "bluff" side and 4 on the "flats" side is a possibility with the actual number dependent on final design. The foregoing are the modifications that present themselves on I-35E. As noted, they represent additional costs; the further disruption of between 10 and 30 persons; the creation of green space; the reduction of noise; and the moving of a former church building. IV - 41 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Modification for Vibration Vibration is of particular concern to the St. Luke's Division of United Hospitals, Inc. , because of the presence of operating rooms within close proximity to the proposed freeway. The concern exists because the underlying material in Segment 6 is limestone of the Platteville designation. With respect to vibration dampening at St. Luke's Hospital, 3 remedial options are available. The first option is to design the roadbed with resilient material so that vibration from traffic is dampened at the source. The second option is to modify the floor construction of critical areas in the hospital, where possible, to dampen vibration. The third option is to arrive at some combination of the first two. Exact design criteria for vibration modifications are not available at this time. The basic premise to be followed is that vibration in the hospital caused by proposed I-35E should not exceed vibration levels that currently exist. To this end, the Minnesota Department of Highways is on record stating that the Department will join with the St. Luke's Division of United Hospitals, Inc. in a study to determine existing vibration levels and determine design parameters. However, this detailed study would commence after a corridor designation for proposed I-35E is final. In any event, it requires emphasizing that vibration is a solvable engineering problem. Business Activity Centers. Because the modifications listed for Alt. 3 do not affect the basic characteristics of the transportation corridor proposed in Alt. 2, it follows that the effects of Alt. 2 and Alt. 3 on the City of St. Paul's business activity centers are identical. Data presented in Section I and in Appendix I indicate that, in the St. Paul Central Business District (C. B. D. ), the leading activity center, the majority of the persons in leadership positions interviewed by an independent polling organization, in March of 1973, favored the Pleasant Ave. corridor by about 2 to 1 over competing corridors (i. e. Shepard Road and T. H. 3 corridors) for I-35E construction. The polling organization was the respected MID- CONTINENT SURVEYS, Inc. , Midwest Plaza Building, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402. In general, the survey suggests that the area's leaders consider it important that there be good access to and from this and other activity centers in Saint Paul. In practical terms, this translates into a desire to maintain and improve the attractiveness of City of St. Paul activity centers so that the vitality of the centers continue. Specifically, it means that the City's business activity centers would benefit considerably if the residents of rapidly developing Dakota, County orient towards St. Paul activity centers. IV - 43 1 1 Social Costs. The method of computing social costs in Alt. 3 is identical to that in Alt. 2 (see page IV - 29) where the capitalized value of losses in residential property values was used. The differences between Alt. 3 and Alt. 2 are that the number of "bluff" homes exposed to noise levels in excess of 70 dBA decline from 44 to 34. Hence the total value of homes used for Social Cost consideration declines to $1, 870, 000 from $2, 420, 000 on the bluff. Value of the "flats" homes remains at $1, 888, 000. (Note: Based on the final design of the Grand Ave. Ramsey St. change, there may be a reduction of $30, 000 to $150, 000 in the total value of the "flats" buildings. ) The estimated social costs in Alt. 3 appear in Table IV - 3. The property value loss remains at 25% and 10% for the "bluff" and "flats" homes respec- tively. The tax rate applied for tax loss purposes is 3. 25%. Number of Homes 34 on Bluff 144 on Flats TABLE IV - 3 ESTIMATED SOCIAL COSTS FOR ALTERNATE 3 IN PLEASANT AVE. CORRIDOR West Seventh St. to Capitol Approach Complex Sums: Total Market Value Value Value Loss Factor Loss $1, 870, 000 25% $467, 500 $1, 888, 000 10% $188, 000 $3, 758, 000 $655, 500 Annual Tax Losses to the City: $655, 500 x 3. 25% = $21, 300 (No discount rate) 20-year Tax Losses = $426, 000 IV - 44 As noted in Alt. 2, it is likely that the probable shifts to more intensive land uses in the "flats" area would generate tax revenues in excess of the losses indicated in Table IV - 3. IV - 45 b. DAKOTA COUNTY EFFECTS The effects of Alternate 3 on Dakota County are identical to those of Alternate 2. For convenience, the effects noted on page IV - 32 are repeated below. By and large, the effects of proposed I-35E on Dakota County are positive. From the outset of the planning process in the County, I-35E has represented a "fixed" reference line. In effect, proposed I-35E is one of the major transportation routes which has allowed the planned urbanization of the westerly half of Dakota County. The construction of proposed I-35E in accordance with Alternate 2 gives Dakota County a major link to the rest of the eastern metropolitan community. It results in a reasonably self-contained roadway which has T. H. 110 as a major terminus on the south and the City of Duluth, Minnesota to the north. An Environmental Impact Statement for proposed I-35E from T. H. 110 to the I-35E junction with I-35 to the south is currently being prepared. However, the West 7th St. to the I-94 Junction Link in St. Paul should not be considered totally dependent on that EIS because of its relative indepen- dence and self -containment. In short, with respect to Dakota County, the construction of proposed I-35E would alleviate all the negative factors that are outlined under "Dakota County Effects" in the Alternate 1 discussion (see page IV - 21). IV - 46 c. CONCLUSION The proposed link for I-35E between West 7th St. and the I-94 Junction at the Capitol Approach Complex represents a legitimate transportation corridor. In this connection, its effects are: 1. It would relieve traffic on the north -south streets in the area southwest of the City of Saint Paul's Central Business District. 2. It would overload east -west Randolph Ave. from Hamline Ave. to its junction with proposed I-35E. 3. It would subject about 178 dwellings and noise -sensitive medical care facilities along the Link to noise levels in excess of 70 decibels on the A -scale which is the established design limit. 4. It would possibly subject the segment between Grand Ave. - Ramsey St. and Kellogg Boulevard to vibration levels in excess of existing levels. 5. It would retain the residential and serene character of St. Clair Ave. between Lexington Parkway and proposed I- 35E. 6. It would permit Dakota County to continue its development as planned. 7. It would retain a major link of the basic freeway network designed to serve the Twin Cities area. 8. It would permit Saint Paul's Short Line Road to function as a major transportation facility. 9. It would satisfy the 5 criteria established for the evaluation of the Alternates with respect to transportation objectives (See Criteria 1 - 5). 10. It would fall short of completely satisfying environmental requirements (Criterion 6). IV - 47 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4. ALTERNATE 4 - CONSTRUCT I-35E TO SHEPARD ROAD, ALONG THE SHEPARD ROAD CORRIDOR, AND CONNECT TO I-35E NORTH OF THE CAPITOL APPROACH COMPLEX This Alternate involves abandoning the Pleasant Ave. corridor from West 7th St. to the Capitol Approach Complex. In its place, it substitutes the existing Shepard Road alignment to the greatest extent possible. The appealing aspect of Alternate 4 and one of the major reasons for its inclusion as an Alternate to study is that in this manner I-35E would occupy right-of-way already in use for transportation uses. In addition, there was the factor that there would be no disruption of neighborhoods. In physical terms, Alt. 4 is a scheme where proposed I-35E would use the Shepard Road right-of-way and traverse the rail yards east of the Saint Paul C. B. D. It involves a project length of about 6. 8 miles. It starts at a location near the current interchange between Shepard Road and inplace I-35E and ends at a location on proposed I-35E between the Pennsylvania Ave. and Maryland Ave. interchanges to the northeast of the Capitol Approach Complex. In this connection, two possibilities exist for Alt. 4. The first is to upgrade existing Shepard Road to freeway standards. The second is to construct a second -level viaduct for proposed I-35E. A ground -level I-35E along the Shepard Road alignment is unworkable. The topography, alignment and man-made constraints along its path rule out considerations for this scheme. Constraints such as the elevations of five bridges Shepard Road goes under and the narrow pier spacings on 3 of them make it impossible to design a facility meeting interstate highway standards. (Note: The T. H. 49 High Bridge, Wabasha Br. , Railroad Br. , Robert St. Br. , and Lafayette Br. : the Northern States Power Co. Generating Plant, grain terminal elevators, and the "tight" space between the Mississippi River and the rail yards near the St. Paul C. B. D. are among the constraints.) In addition, a ground level I-35E along Shepard Road is impractical because 1) limitation of access would be disruptive to the current function of Shepard Rd. and 2) right-of-way restrictions - namely the Mississippi River on one side and the mainline tracks of the Chicago -Milwaukee -St. Paul and Pacific Ry. on the other are too great. While it is an appealing prospect to some parties to convert railroad right-of-way to highway use, thus trans- ferring transportation right-of-way from one mode to another, it is not realistic, and 3) Shepard Road's current presence in a flood plain makes it preferable to avoid a similar condition for I-35E. An elevated I-35E over Shepard Road (a second -tier viaduct) is possible, albeit barely. However, an elevated I-35E has inherent shortcomings. First, it would not permit access from any streets. This would have the net effect of limiting the traffic which would use the roadway. Second, viaducts represent an expensive type of construction. In effect, viaducts are continuous bridges. An I-35E viaduct meeting interstate highway standards would require a 4-lane wide structure at a minimum. IV - 49 1 1 1 a. CITY OF SAINT PAUL EFFECTS Transportation. The projected 1985 traffic figures for a viaduct along Shepard Road appear in fig. 40. Reference to the figure reveals that approxi- mately 8, 000 to 10, 000 vehicles per day are likely to use the viaduct. This illustrates the effects of a no -access condition that a viaduct often necessitates. In addition, the estimates are that there would be between 35, 000 and 40, 000 vehicles per day on existing Shepard Road below. This compares with approximately 60, 000 to 70, 000 vehicles per day estimated for the Pleasant Ave. corridor. In terms of Alt. 4's effects on transportation in the St. Paul C. B. D. , the likelihood is that they would be detrimental. The reason for this statement is that Alt. 4 includes heavy traffic on inplace Shepard Road below. With the proposed Chestnut St. interchange and the Jackson St. - Sibley St. one-way couplet the C. B. D. 's only points of entry and exit, congestion levels in the downtown streets would increase noticeably. This is not a desirable effect. Further, the fact that Alt. 4 does not provide for a direct connection to the City's Short Line Road serving the Midway area is a disadvantage. For example, the absence of such a connection is likely to result in an increase of commercial truck traffic on existing arterial streets as the demand for goods and materials increases, and indeed it will. The arterials affected are likely to be West 7th St. , Snelling Ave. , Shepard Road and Montreal Ave. This IV - 50 development would tend to prove detrimental. By any standard of measurement used in transportation planning, the very low usage projected for the viaduct would not justify its construction. The only exception would be if a planning objective other than transportation was the overriding factor. Environment. From a standpoint of environmental physical factors such as noise, air pollution, etc. , the effects of the viaduct are minimal when compared with the effects of traffic on Shepard Road below. It is the Consultant's opinion that the most objectionable aspects of Alt. 4 relate to the limitations the alternate would impose on future planning efforts. For example, one of the long range desires of many cities with river - front exposures has been to transform their use to parklands and living spaces from other uses. (In the case of St. Paul, extensive rail yards currently occupy the riverfront area of the City. ) In this connection, there are plans in St. Paul now which call for the development of apartments and recreational areas on the riverfront area near the City's C. B. D. A viaduct would be detrimental to such hopes by representing an unsightly barrier. Business Activity Centers. Because Alt. 4 is in the form of a viaduct, it would have few, if any, entrance and exit points along it. Thus, although it would occupy space to the Mississippi River side and to the east of the St. Paul IV - 51 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 SHORT LINE RD. RANDOLPH AVE. A4. T. H.49/ T. H.94 4 I w r0 `$0 C.S.A.H.30 to 2 ( ) AVERAGE DAILY TRAVEL IN 1000 VEHICLES PER DAY C.S.A.H.26 Scale in Miles 0 2 TH 4 Figure 40 Travel Forecasts for 1985 - Alt. 4 N- 52 1 1 C. B. D. , it would not be able to provide meaningful access to and from it. Accordingly, the C. B. D. , the City's primary business activity center would not be the recipient of benefits that accrue from improved access to such activity centers. Moreover, with 1985 traffic projections on the viaduct in the range of 8, 000 to 10, 000 vehicles per day (see fig. 40), the impact of Alt. 4 as regards to improving accessibility to any activity center would be limited. The high level of traffic (35, 000 - 40, 000 vehicles per day) on existing Shepard Road referred to in the discussion of Transportation factors of Alt. 4 earlier does not bode well for St. Paul's C. B. D. As the discussion noted, congestion levels on the streets in the C. B. D. would probably increase noticeably with Alt. 4. It is difficult to consider this development to be anything but detrimental to C. B. D. activities. Social Costs. Existing land use along Shepard Road consists mainly of a Northern States Power Company plant, grain elevators, fuel storage depots, a solid waste disposal yard, and rail yards. These are facilities situated on the low-level lands along the Shepard Road corridor. Social Costs associated with a viaduct (continuous bridge) traversing air space over existing Shepard Road or existing railroad trackage on the facilities mentioned above would pro- bably be negligible. Similarly, it is unlikely that the social effects on the neighborhoods IV - 53 situated on the bluff rising above the low-level lands will be severe. Yet, it is the Consultant's opinion that Alt. 4 represents a potentially serious social cost with the City of St. Paul the probable loser. Reference to the discussion on Environment given earlier relates to the Consultant's view that Alt. 4 would hinder amenity -type developments along the riverfront. The Consultant considers such a limitation undesirable. IV - 54 b. DAKOTA COUNTY EFFECTS Alternate 4 with proposed I-35E in the Shepard Ave. corridor does not affect the location of the proposed highway in Dakota County. Consequently, it would appear that Alt. 4's effects on Dakota County traffic should be the same as those given for Alternates 2 and 3. To a considerable degree, this deduction should prove correct. However, an important point requires stating here. In transportation planning, a most important factor in establishing travel demand is the matching of the location of places of residence to places of employment. Thus, any notable shifts in one or the other item affect travel demand. In Alt. 4, the accessibility of St. Paul's C. B. D. and Midway areas suffer because travel to and from them are likely to be on congested streets. Consequently, activity centers in Hennepin County would have the opportunity of becoming more competitive with the St. Paul centers. A shift to the west for Dakota County residents because of the increased attraction of competing Hennepin County centers would reduce travel on I-35E in Dakota County from its interchange with proposed I-494 northward. IV - 55 c. CONCLUSION Alternate 4, which features proposed I-35E construction as a second -tier viaduct along the Shepard Road corridor in the City of St. Paul, rates more as a possibility than as a viable alternate. The reasons for this conclusion about Alt. 4 are as follows: 1. Its projected usage level (8, 000 - 10, 000 vehicles per day) would be below levels that would justify the construction of any interstate highway. 2. It would not relieve traffic on the north -south streets in the area southwest of the City of St. Paul's Central Business District. 3. It would not provide adequate access to either the St. Paul C. B. D. or to the City's business activity center in the Midway area. 4. It would hinder development of the riverfront area near the St. Paul C. B. D. for use as recreational and living spaces. 5. It would eliminate the environmental harm in the Pleasant Ave. corridor noted in Alternates 2 and 3. 6. It would permit Dakota County to continue its development as planned. 7. It would satisfy 2 of the 5 transportation -related Criteria used for evaluation (Criteria 2 and 5). 8. It would satisfy environmental requirements with respect to existing land uses (Criteria 6). IV - 56 5. ALTERNATE 5 - CONSTRUCT I-35F FROM I-35 TO I-494, CONTINUE I-35E AS A "COMMON" SECTION WITH I-494 TO T.H. 3, CONTINUE I-35E ALONG T.H. 3, AND CONNECT TO INPLACE I- 35E NORTH OF THE CAPITOL APPROACH COMPLEX This Alternate is one that RIP-35E, a citizen's group opposed to the construction of I-35E in the Pleasant Ave. corridor, helped formulate and advocates. The Consultant understands that it consists of the following primary features: 1. Construct a high-speed roadway to Randolph Avenue so that there are connections to the City of St. Paul's Short Line Road. 2. Construct a parkway of limited capacity from Randolph Ave. to Grand Ave. - Ramsey St. and have a street between Grand Ave. - Ramsey St. and Kellogg Boulevard to service the institutions and hospitals in the s egment. 3. Construct I-35E along T.H. 3 (Lafayette Expressway) and extend I-35E from the Lafayette Expressway - East 7th St. interchange in St. Paul. northerly to inplace I-35E between the Pennsylvania Ave. and Maryland Ave. interchanges. 4. Completely revise the inplace T. H. 3 - East 7th St. interchange because there is currently an at -grade intersection between the two which is not consistent with interstate roadway design standards. 5. Upgrade Shepard Road between the inplace I-35E - Shepard Road inter- change and the City of St. Paul C.B.D. 6. Extend West Sixth St. (one way from C. B. D. ) from its intersection at Main St. and connect it to an inplace ramp leading to westbound I-94. Please see fig. 43. 7. Extend the westerly end of an inplace ramp from 12th St. Frontage Road towards the southwest and connect it to West Fifth St. (one way to C.B. D. ). Please see fig. 43. 8. Connect I-35E between I-494 and T.H. 110, a distance of 0.76 miles. (This is Consultant addition. ) IV - 57 a. CITY OF SAINT PAUL EFFECTS Transportation. Figs. 41 and 42 give 1985 travel projections in the Pleasant Ave. corridor and in Dakota County respectively for Alt. 5. The important projections are those for Shepard Road (29, 000 vehicles per day to 46, 800 vehicles per day); for T. H. 3, or I-35E in this case, between Butler Ave. and I-94 (52, 800 v. p. d. to 74, 100 v. p. d. ); and for West 7th Street (18, 200 v. p. d. ). The expected traffic volumes on Shepard Road present serious problems at C. B. D. intersections and/or interchanges. The City of St. Paul has plans to improve Shepard Road from the C. B. D. southwesterly to Randolph Ave. with the major element of the improvement an interchange at Chestnut St. However, the Chestnut St. interchange is a low capacity interchange. Thus there is a need for additional locations where traffic could proceed into and out of the C. B. D. The two streets which are the most probable candidates are Jackson St. and Sibley St. These streets form a one-way couplet, with Jackson St. , the Mississippi River and Sibley St. northbound. It would be desirable to develop an interchange between Shepard Road and the 2 streets to permit relatively fluid traffic flow. However, the existing street grades, the direction of Shepard Road, and space limitations between the river and the inplace railroad tracks make an interchange at this location unlikely. The result is that congestion -associated costs on Shepard Road would be a common occurrence. I - 58 ow 1 I 11111 MIK NW M I IR* N 11111C. NM — i m— — is — MARSHALL AVE. SUMMIT AVE. GRAND AVE. ST. CLAIR AVE. JEFFERSON AVE. RANDOLPH AVE. LEXINGTON () AVERAGE DAILY TRAVEL IN 1000 VEHICLES PER DAY SCALE IN FEET 1600 0 1600 3200 Figure 41. Travel Forecasts for 1985 in Pleasant Ave. Corridor -Alt 5 SHORT LINE RD. RANDOLPH AyE. T H.49 T. H.94 \ y` \(0. S4.'L ( 30.9) w WENTWORT 0 w (33.5) TH.IIcr' . W (140) ; ; o• (38.3) ry'/1 4(8.7) (5.5) C.S.A.H.30 0) 2 ( ) AVERAGE DAILY TRAVEL IN 1000 VEHICLES PER DAY C.S.A.H.26 Scale in Miles 0 2 H.94 D. 4 Figure 42. Travel Forecasts for 1985 in Dakota County -Alt. 5 N-60 The projected 1985 traffic volumes (18, 000 v. p. d. ) on West 7th St. in Alt. 5 approach the 22, 000 vehicles per day capacity of the street. In this connection, it requires noting that the capacity of West 7th St. is not consistently 22, 000 v. p. d. throughout its entire length in the project area. Thus, the 18, 000 vehicles per day on West 7th St. represent a volume where congestion on this Arterial street can be expected. The projected 1985 traffic volumes in fig. 42 on the Lafayette Bridge of 74, 100 vehicles per day along proposed I-35E in the T. H. 3 corridor creates 2 major problems. The first is that the 4-lane Lafayette Bridge cannot handle 74, 100 vehicles per day. (The average capacity of a 4-lane freeway is about 48, 000 v. p. d. ). Thus, a 2-lane addition on the Lafayette Bridge would be necessary for Alt. 5 to function. The second is the operational problems caused by an I-35E (along T. H. 3) connection from East Seventh St. to inplace I-35E north of the Capitol Approach Complex. Physically, unless a wholesale change along I-35E north of the Capitol Complex is made, the only location the connection between I-35E from the South to inplace I-35E to the North can occur is between the Pennsylvania Ave. and Maryland Ave. interchanges. (The two cross streets are about 5200 ft. center to center. ) In between the two cross -streets, there is a long bridge (about 1/4 mile) which carries inplace I-35E over the railyards. The logical location for the connection of the two I-35Ets is between the north end of the railroad bridge and Maryland Ave. This stretch is about IV - 61 1500 ft. long (from bridge end to start of south -quadrant ramps). Considering that interstate highway mainline grades average 3% or less, it is apparent that the distance is not sufficient to permit weaving and to elevate over the I-35E bridge. Thus, the trade-off necessary to make the connection is to delete the south quadrant ramps at Maryland Ave. The plan view of this area appears in fig. 43. Fig. 43 also shows the connections from westbound 12th St. to Fifth St. and from Sixth St. to westbound I-94. Two possibilities for these connections exist. The first is to have an at -grade intersection between the two connec- tions which would restrict capacity. The second is to have a grade separation where the connection to Fifth St. goes over the one from Sixth St. To make this configuration work, the curvature necessary is a sharp one and the design is not a desirable one. Without a doubt, the major problem associated with Alt. 5 in St. Paul is the complete revision that would be necessary at the Lafayette Expressway - East 7th St. interchange. Invariably the revision would involve enlarging the interchange area. An estimated 6 to 10 industrial facilities would require relocation. It appears that a combination of lowering East 7th St. or elevating proposed I-35E to a viaduct section is a logical possibility. Regardless of what is done, the interchange changes represent a high -cost item. However, even with a new interchange at this location, congestion at this point is likely IV - 62 Figure 43. Location Map for I-35E Connection from East 7th St. to I-35E North N- 63 to be at undesirable levels because of high traffic volumes involved (see fig. 42). The indications are that Alt. 5 would cause heavy traffic concentrations in the St. Paul C. B. D. The Alternate's reliance on West 7th St. and on Shepard Road for travel to and from the area southwesterly of the C. B. D. does not permit a reasonable "bypass" option for motorists whose destinations are to points beyond. A similar situation occurs with traffic from the north with destinations situated in areas to the southwest of the C. B. D. This Alternate forces motorists onto West 5th St. (one-way towards the C. B. D.) prior to proceeding on West 7th St. or Shepard Road to their destinations. In either case, the infusion of such traffic loads onto C. B. D. streets for purposes of passing through is undesirable. Moreover, Alternate 5 provides only slightly better mobility levels for St. Paul residents situated to the south- west of the C. B. D. than would generally be available under the do-nothing alternate (see fig. 37). Environment. Because Alt. 5 proposes to traverse right-of-way within the City of St. Paul currently in use as industrial lands and railroad trackage, it does not have any adverse effects on the residential sections of the City. Rather, Alt. 5 involves the acquisition of between 6 and 10 commercial - industrial buildings in the vicinity of the East 7th St. - Lafayette Freeway interchange area because of the requirements for a new interchange. IV - 64 There is no way of knowing whether these St. Paul industries would relocate within the City. The estimated cost of the industrial buildings is in excess of $3, 000, 000 (1972) according to City of St. Paul records. Business Activity Centers. The discussions on the transportation effects of Alt. 5 given earlier reveal that entry into the St. Paul C. B. D. occurs via the following streets: 1) Shepard Road, 2) West 7th St. , 3) West 5th St. , and 4) East 7th St. - East 8th St. (one-way couplet). As the traffic projections indicated, the travel on these streets would not all be to the C. B. D. Thus, through traffic with destinations other than the C. B. D. would needlessly congest the streets in the City's primary business activity center. By any standard, this is not a desirable feature and it would only lessen the center's attraction factor. With respect to the Midway district, Alt. 5 provides the same connection near Randolph Ave. that Alternates 2 and 3 do. Social Costs. The social costs associated with Alt. 5 relate mostly to the undesirable congestion levels which would occur in the C. B. D. and on roads leading into it. Most notably, this would occur on Shepard Road, on East 7th St. , and probably on the Sibley St. - Jackson St. one-way couplet. In addition, St. Paul residents situated to the southwest of the C. B. D. would suffer from a lack of access by having to use City streets. Their time and IV - 65 safety losses represent social costs. (The currently available data do not permit making a meaningful estimate for this item. ) A consideration of potential significance for the City of St. Paul is employment, or loss of it. In the event the industrial and commercial buildings that would be acquired for the East 7th St. area interchange do not relocate in the City, the loss of employment would be a social cost. It is not possible to determine where the parties would relocate at this time. IV - 66 b. DAKOTA COUNTY EFFECTS Transportation. On the basis that a connection of 0. 76 miles along the currently proposed I-35E corridor from I-494 to T. H. 110 becomes a reality, the major point of interest in traffic is that only about 10, 000 to 15, 000 vehicles per day from western Dakota County are attracted to proposed I-35E along the T. H. 3 alignment. However, this projection precedes the announcement of the Eagandale Complex planned along I-494. The remainder of the traffic from Western Dakota County continues along the currently proposed I-35E corridor to T. H. 110 and beyond. Although the projected travel attracted to the T. H. 3 corridor is not large, the volumes from Wentworth Ave. to the north suggest that 2 lanes in addition to the 4 lanes provided are necessary (volumes range between 52, 000 and 74, 100 v. p. d. ). This involves a length of about 3. 3 miles. Reference to the final plans used for T. H. 3 construction reveals it is possible to add 2 lanes on the "inside" negating further right-of-way acquisition on about one -eighth (0. 42 mi.) of the total distance required. Along the remainder of the approximately 3. 3 miles, lane additions necessitate the acquisition of more right-of-way or the construction of retaining walls where applicable and possible. The effects of rerouting proposed I-35E along the corridor also proposed for 1-494 depend in part on the final form the I-35E, I-494, T. H. 55 interchange IV - 67 takes. The travel projections for 1985 appearing in fig. 42 do not suggest that the impact along I-494 will be severe. The exception to this opinion occurs at the I-494 - T. H. 3 interchange area where the additional volume of traffic is likely to affect the design of the interchange noticeably. It is necessary to repeat here that, for lack of definitive data, the projections in fig. 42 exclude the effects on traffic the Eagandale Complex will have on both the 1-494 and on the I-35E in the T. H. 3 corridors. The probability is that the numbers will increase and may result in the need for yet additional lanes on both corridors. Land Use. For over 20 years, a period coinciding with the County's development, a basic "given" for land use planning in Dakota County has been the location of proposed 1-35E. That corridor is the one used in Alternates 2, 3 and 4. While Alt. 5 maintains the aforementioned corridor as a highway, it does shift the interstate highway designation to the T. H. 3 corridor. Hence, it is necessary to examine the land use along this corridor. Figs. 44 and 45 depict the land uses in the Cities of West St. Paul and South St. Paul respectively. As the figures show, I-35E in the T. H. 3 corridor straddles the city limits between the two communities. As figs. 44 and 45 illustrate, the land use along 1-35E is mostly residential in South St. Paul, while it is generally split between industrial, residential, IV - 68 and recreational uses in West St. Paul. In this connection, the recreational lands are of particular importance. Kaposia Park, situated along I-35E in the T. H. 3 corridor is a recreational area where there would be Section 4(f) involvement if additional right-of-way for adding 2 more lanes is necessary. Social Costs. The T. H. 3 corridor is one where a new expressway is partially complete. The design of the expressway is up to freeway standards. However, the traffic volumes T. H. 3 is designed to handle are about 48, 000 vehicles per day in 1992. The social costs associated with I-35E in the T. H. 3 corridor relate to the additional right-of-way which may be necessary for additional lanes. This is more serious than it appears on the surface because planning in the Commun- ities along T. H 3 has been on the basis of a no interstate -highway in the corridor. Accordingly, the opposition to I-35E in the T. H. 3 corridor is great. (See Appendix 5 for statements regarding I-35E in Dakota County. ) Census data for 1970 reveal that the residential areas abutting T. H. 3 average about $24, 000 per single family dwelling unit. In addition, a review of T. H. 3 expressway plans suggest that in excess of 25 dwellings may have to be acquired for right-of-way purposes for the construction of 2 additional lanes if I-35E is placed in the T. H. 3 corridor. This represents a cost in excess of $600, 000 for this purpose alone. IV - 69 single & two family residential Figure 44. Land Use Map for West St Paul - 70 IA lid %.•r r 7 V 7 %' / RD RA RB RC RD CI C2 IA IB TP LEGEND SINGLE FAMILY RES IDENCE DISTRICT DUPLEX RESIDENCE DISTRICT GENERAL RESIDENCE DISTRICT APARTMENT RESIDENCE DISTRICT GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT AREAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT HEAVY INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT TRAILER COACH PARK RD Figure 45. Land Use Map for South St. Paul IV - 7 I t 1 c. CONCLUSION Alternate 5, which features proposed I-35E in the I-494 and T. H. 3 corridors in Dakota County, combines a mixture of effects. They are as follow s: 1. It would require the construction of a major new interchange area near the East 7th St. - Lafayette Freeway (T. H. 3) intersection. This interchange would also affect connections to inplace I-94. 2. It would require the acquisition of new right-of-way (industrial -commercial) in the vicinity of the intersection between East 7th St. and the Lafayette Expressway (T. H. 3). 3. It would require the widening of the Lafayette Expressway Bridge over the Mississippi River by at least 2 lanes because of increased traffic. 4. It would require the elimination of 2 inplace ramps that represent the southerly half of the inplace I-35E interchange at Maryland Ave. 5. It would lead to heavy congestion on the streets of the City of St. Paul's Central Business District. 6. It would overload Shepard Road near the St. Paul C. B. D. if major design modifications at the Sibley St. - Jackson St. intersections with Shepard Road are not made. 7. It would not provide St. Paul residents situated to the southwest of the City's C. B. D. with improved levels of mobility. 8. It would reduce noise, vibration, and air pollution along the Pleasant Ave. corridor and shift it to the East 7th interchange area noted in item 1 above. 9. It would probably eliminate the possibility of any new neighborhood disruption in the Summit -Hill community by minimizing the chances of any mass "exodus" from the City by high -income families currently residing there. 10. It would provide a connection to the City of St. Paul's Short Line Road. 11. It would make use of the Lafayette freeway (T. H. 3) and of the I-35E bridge crossings albeit on a larger than planned scale of the former and on a reduced scale of the latter. IV - 72 12. It would require the construction of an additional 2 lanes in the T. H. 3 corridor if proposed I-35E is routed along it. This would require the lengthening of bridges at Butler Ave. and at Belvidere St. and the widening of the T. H. 3 bridge over Concord St. 13. It would require interchange modifications along the T. H. 3 corridor at the I-494 - T. H. 3 - Butler Ave. , and the T. H. 3 - Concord St. interchanges respectively. 14. Additional right-of-way acquisitions required for construction of proposed I-35E along the T. H. 3 corridor would be either residential properties or Section 4(f) lands from Kaposia Park. In sum, the general conclusion is that Alternate 5 1) benefits the residential sector along the Pleasant Ave. corridor by reducing the negative harmful effects of traffic; 2) shifts the environmental effects to the East 7th St. - T. H. 3 area and to the T. H. 3 corridor in Dakota County; 3) attempts to make use of parts of I-35E construction completed (or near completion) to date; 4) increases congestion levels near and in the St. Paul C. B. D. markedly; 5) satisfies expected travel demands to a limited extent; and 6) necessitates considerable new construction for rerouted I-35E and on City of St. Paul streets. IV - 73 6. ALTERNATE 6 - CONSTRUCT I-35E FROM I-35 TO DAKOTA COUNTY ROAD 30, CONTINUE I-35E ALONG DAKOTA CO. ROAD 30 EASTERLY TO T. H. 3, CONTINUE I-35E ALONG T. H. 3 AND CONNECT TO INPLACE I-35E NORTH OF THE CAPITOL APPROACH COMPLEX This Alternate is the first one presented to the Consultant by RIP-35E, a Citizens group opposed to the construction of I-35E in the Pleasant Ave. corridor, as a potential substitute. The Alternate involves about 16. 3 miles of new construction if implemented. As presented to the Consultant, it was the RIP-35E view that this proposed routing for proposed I-35E might be the least disruptive for the City of St. Paul, and possibly for Dakota County as well. The concept for Alternate 6 requires that the currently proposed I-35E corridor in Dakota County be abandoned as an interstate highway corridor. The exception is the already inplace link from T. H. 110 in Dakota Co. to West 7th St. in St. Paul (Ramsey Co. ). In so doing, the RIP-35E premise was that "interstate" traffic would go around the City of St. Paul rather than needlessly enter it. Because Alt. 6 suggests the construction of a bypass -type of freeway at a location to the south of existing metropolitan development, it requires evaluating its "metropolitan effects' first. Fig. 46 depicts the projected 1990 limits of urbanization in the St. Paul - IV - 74 Minneapolis metropolitan area with the location of Alt. 6 superimposed on it. Fig. 46 indicates that Co. Rd. 30 in Dakota County is near the southern extremity of the area's projected urbanization limits. With the expanse of Ye' -to-urbanize lands between the developed portions of the Twin Cities metropolitan area and the southerly sector of Dakota Co. , an interstate freeway which would tend to encourage leap -frog development makes little sense. Regardless, it appeared reasonable to continue the analysis of Alt. 6 on the assumption that there may be other factors which would be supportive of its selection. Fig. 47 gives the projected 1985 travel for proposed I-35E in the Dakota Co. Road 30 and new T. H. 3 corridors. It also includes 1985 projections for selected arterial streets near the Pleasant Ave. corridor in St. Paul and on proposed 1-494 in Dakota County. IV - 75 — it ■I! N M M r TWIN CITIES METROPOLITAN AREA 1990 LIMITS OF URBANIZATION Scale ii Miles 2 f T 1 _1 ANOKA \ ..... NENNE Figure 46. Limits of Urbanization for Twin Cities Metropolitan Area-I990 (Source. Metropolitan Transit Commission) 1 t a. CITY OF SAINT PAUL EFFECTS Reference to fig. 47 reveals that the traffic projections for the St. Paul arterial streets included in it are similar to those of the Do -Nothing Alternate given in fig. 37. This applies to the streets southwesterly of the St. Paul C. B. D. Moreover, fig. 47 indicates that the traffic projections for Alt. 6 in the new T. H. 3 corridor are similar to those given for Alt. 5 in fig. 42, especially in its St. Paul part. Because of these similarities, the effects of Alt 6 on the City of St. Paul should be similar to those of Alt. 1 and of Alt. 5 respec- tively. (See pages IV - 17 and IV - 58 for details. ) IV - 77 b. DAKOTA COUNTY EFFECTS Alternates 5 and 6 both make use of the new T. H. 3 corridor in Dakota County for parts of proposed I-35E construction. Figs. 42 and 47 depict 1985 traffic projections for Alternates 5 and 6 respectively. Reference to the figures reveals that the projections are similar in the new T. H. 3 corridor from I-494 northward. Alt. 6 traffic projections are consistently lower by a margin of 8% or less. The similarity of the projections suggests that the effects of the 2 Alternates along their "common" section should be identical. Thus, effects noted in Alt. 5 for proposed I-35E in the new T. H. 3 corridor from the 1-494 - T. H. 3 interchange area apply to Alt. 6 as well. (See page IV - 67 for details. The differences between Alt. 5 and Alt. 6 occur south of 1-494. First, the deletion of the proposed I-35E corridor from Dakota Co. Road 30 to T. H. 110 (see fig. 47) effectively eliminates that corridor from the westerly half of Dakota County's transportation network. Second, rerouting proposed I-35E along Dakota Co. Road 30 results in the need to traverse an area which includes a chain of lakes called the Marcott Lakes (see fig. 35 for location). The attempt to construct a freeway through the chain would result in serious environmental harm to the area. IV - 78 t 1 t SHORT LINE RD. RANDOLPH AVE. TH 494 TH.94 (17.1) co'� ;s, BUTLEF 4J WENTWORT ( ) AVERAGE DAILY M TRAVEL IN 1000 VEHICLES PER DAY 0�4� �, ePR o� PLATO (35.0) cr w 47▪ ') Q (32.2) THI10 2\ uJ (31.5 (313 (273) ��Z91141111111 ti. •%. T 10.9) 5.9) `II�Li 73 ♦� 113?1 • • teoe ,<;I tn 2 N `4' H ,AVE. S 0�1 W BLVD. St (625) w-11-{55. () C.S.A.H.26 Scale in Miles 0 2 0, 4 Figure 47. Travel Forecasts for 1985 - Alt. 6 1 IV-79 c. CONCLUSION By any reasonable standard of measurement, Alternate 6, with proposed I-35E in the T. H. 3 corridor via Dakota County Road 30, is unacceptable and should be dropped from further consideration. As an Alternate, it fails conceptually, environmentally, and in satisfying transportation needs. The premises for this conclusion follow. 1. The basic reasons that led to the unacceptability of Alt. 1 apply to Alt. 6 as well. (See Conclusion - Alt. 1. ) 2. The undesirable effects in the T. H. 3 corridor for Alt. 5 apply to Alt. 6 without any redeeming factors. (See Conclusion - Alt. 5. ) 3. The 1985 traffic projections for Alt. 6 indicate usage levels for proposed I-35E from its junction with I-35 to its junction with T. H. 55 do not justify an interstate highway design. (See fig. 47. ) 4. Alt. 6's environmental effects in the Marcott Lakes area are likely to be worse than proposed I-35E's effects in competing corridors. (Applies to Dakota County effects. ) IV - 80 7 ALTERNATE 7 - MASS TRANSIT This alternate relates to providing mass transit (i. e. public transportation) in the proposed I-35E corridor between West 7th St. and the Capitol Approach Complex in St. Paul. To a lesser extent, it relates to mass transit along the currently proposed I-35E corridor in Dakota County. The fuel shortage of 1973, which appears likely to continue into the future, certainly makes it desirable to use public transportation at every opportunity. In concept, this is certainly true. In practice and in realistic terms, it is the Consultant's opinion that mass transit for the Twin Cities area will continue to show reliance on buses and busways for the foreseeable future. The premises for this statement are: --It is unlikely that a decision on the type of mass transit system to use will come before the 1975 Minnesota Legislature convenes. --There is as yet no system which has garnered dominant support. Fixed guideways using large vehicles supplemented by bus routes is the system advanced by the Metropolitan Transit Commission. Personal Rapid Transit, which employs the use of small vehicles on fixed guideways, is the system advocated by some members of the Minnesota Legislature. A greatly expanded bus system emphasizing flexibility has the support of the Metropolitan Council. Car pooling and making more judicious use of the existing trans- portation network is the latest position advanced by the Twin Cities Citizens League. In short, unanimity on a mass transit system is literally non - IV - 81 existent at this point in time. Thus, excepting bus transportation and car pooling, to expect that a functioning system will be on-line in the next 10 years in this area is unrealistic. As the foregoing indicates, a new -technology mass transit system in the Twin Cities area is not likely to materialize soon. Moreover, it is unlikely that the American public will give up the mobility it possesses unless it is absolutely essential. In the meantime, it is likely that the public will opt for smaller and more economical cars in light of fuel shortages and high prices. This much can be said, however, the automobile or some type of substitute vehicle is not likely to disappear in the foreseeable future. With respect to I-35E, the Metropolitan Transit Commission (MTC) does not rate the Pleasant Ave. corridor very high or with any degree of urgency. In Dakota County, however, the MTC expects to run express buses on I-35E. It is unlikely that any other agencies or other plans consider the I-35E corridor as one requiring immediate attention for mass transit. IV - 82 D. COMPARISON OF ALTERNATES 1. GENERAL As stated earlier in Section III and at the outset of Section IV, the Alternates selected for study in this Report were the result of a cursory map examination. This occurred because it was impossible to eliminate any proposed Alternate for lack of definitive data on which to base judgments. Implicitly, the selection process mentioned above accepts the possibility that any Alternate(s) may prove out to be of little or no value at some point in the analytical process. Based on the analyses given to this point, it appears that a 2-step evaluation of the Alternates is reasonable. The first step is to determine how each Alternate rates from a conceptual standpoint. Thus, if any Alternate fails badly in conceptual terms, this offers a means of eliminating it from further analyses and considerations. The second step is to compare in further detail the Alternates which satisfy conceptual requirements. References to the analyses given thus far reveal that there are no cost - benefit analyses included. The reason for this was the desire to delay such analyses until the Alternates proved to be sound in concept first. Hence, the 2-step analysis approach of Conceptual Acceptability and Cost -Benefit evaluation. IV - 83 2. CONCEPTUAL ACCEPTABILITY It is the Consultant's view that after the analyses given for each of the Alternates to this point, it is possible to eliminate 2 entirely - Alternates 1 and 6 - and to downgrade 1 - Alt. 4 - considerably. In effect, this eliminates the Do -Nothing Alternate (Alt. 1) and the Dakota County Road 30 to T. H. 3 rerouting of proposed I-35E (Alt. 6). Further, it places the Shepard Road corridor (Alt. 4) in the highly doubtful category. In the cases of Alternates 1 and 6, the elimination based on a conceptual analysis is absolute. In the case of Alt. 4 - the Shepard Road corridor - a subsequent test of costs and benefits will be applied. This is because it has positive features in St. Paul, such as minimal right-of-way needs and traversing of existing transportation land uses (i. e. railroad yards and Shepard Road). Thus, despite the Alternate's conceptual and physical shortcomings, it appears in order to examine the costs and benefits of the Shepard Road corridor prior to stating a final view. On the basis of concept along, the most prominent 2 corridors to consider for the location of proposed I-35E are 1) the currently proposed Pleasant Ave. corridor and 2) the T. H. 3 corridor (i. e. the Lafayette freeway). A review of each corridor's features regarding transportation, environment, business activity centers, and social costs indicate the following. Transportation. In terms of transportation characteristics, the Pleasant Ave. corridor (Alt. 2, 3) is superior to the T. H. 3 corridor referred to in Alt. 5. IV - 84 In the City of St. Paul, Alternates 2 and 3 provide markedly better transportation services to the approximately 50, 000 residents situated to the southwest of the City's C. B. D. than does Alt. 5. The premise for this state- ment is that proposed I-35E in the Pleasant Ave. corridor results in higher traffic capacity, lower congestion levels, and thus in superior levels of service. In addition, the Pleasant Ave. corridor provides a "bypass" condition around the City's Central Business District for traffic to and from the southwest sector mentioned above. This is preferable to the Alt. 5 condition where the same traffic is forced to travel on C. B. D. streets instead of bypassing them. In Dakota County, Alternates 2, 3, 4 and 5 all satisfy the County's needs to have high-speed access to and from the City of St. Paul along the currently proposed I-35E corridor in the westerly half of the County. This is a critical consideration because, as a given, this location has guided planning efforts in the County for over 20 years. It requires noting here that if the three-quarter mile connection from 1-494 to T. H. 110 along the proposed I-35E corridor in Dakota County were not a part of Alt. 5, the Alternate would be unacceptable according to transportation planning criteria for the Twin Cities. With respect to metropolitan considerations, the most serious implications of Alt. 5 are that residents in both northwestern Dakota Co. and in the area to IV-85 the southwest of the C. B. D. in St. Paul are less adequately served than would be the case with Alternates 2 or 3. Environment. In terms of environmental effects, both the Pleasant Ave. and the T. H. 3 corridors have shortcomings of differing magnitudes. In the City of St. Paul, the Pleasant Ave. corridor traverses an area residential in character. As such, it affects residential properties considerably. Moreover, parts of the proposed corridor are near an Historic Hill District and pass by about 4 hospitals. In short, there are "sensitive" land uses and buildings along it. The result is that the negative effects which associate with interstate highways, such as noise, vibration, air pollution and others assume greater importance than otherwise may be the case. The T. H. 3 corridor contrasts the foregoing by shifting the interstate freeway impact from the City's residential areas to the industrial -commercial area near East 7th St. In this plan, the negative effects on the "sensitive" areas in the Pleasant Ave. corridor are either minimized or eliminated. However, this development extracts a price also in 2 notable ways. The first is that Alt. 5 affects the socio-economic environment of the City by displacing employment centers near the East 7th St. - Lafayette Freeway intersection area. In the event that the displaced companies do not relocate within the City, it is necessary to view the displacements as a loss. IV - 86 Secondly, for the Alt. 5 plan to function, a major overhaul of the existing East 7th St. - Lafayette Freeway - I-94 interchange is inescapable. Any new interchange has to be more elaborate and cover more land than the existing one does. If this occurs, the area directly to the east of the Capitol Approach Complex will resemble one continuous interchange stretching over a length exceeding 1 mile. It is difficult to visualize that this would be a desirable development. In Dakota County, the comparison between Alternates 2 and 3 and Alternate 5 relate to the T. H. 3 corridor only because all of them provide for a highway along the currently proposed I-35E corridor in the westerly half of the County. The T. H. 3 corridor proposed for I-35E in Alt. 5 is already a major transportation corridor. Trunk Highway 3, designed to freeway standards, is under construction (1973). Right-of-way acquisition for this facility is complete. In Alt. 5, it is necessary to widen T. H. 3 by at least 2 lanes (T. H. 3 is basically a 4-lane facility). Both the Cities of South St. Paul and West St. Paul, between which T. H. 3 passes, are formally opposed to this change. The reasons appear to be concern about the increased traffic volumes and their effect; the probable need for additional right-of-way acquisition; and the possibility of taking additional space from Kaposia Park, a major recreational facility along the corridor. Business Activity Centers. In terms of service to business activity IV - 87 centers, the Pleasant Ave. corridor plan incorporates more desirable features than the T. H. 3 corridor does regarding service to the St. Paul C. B. D. and the Midway area while Alternates 2, 3, and 5 are likely to have nearly identical effects on the proposed Eagandale center and others in Dakota County. The issue in this comparison is whether it is more desirable to direct traffic from various directions into the C. B. D. (and other centers) or to provide a "bypass" condition with access locations to it. It is the view here that the latter is preferable. The premise for the foregoing statement is that a condition where traffic is forced to enter the C. B. D. even if the destinations are to points beyond will lead to congestion, a negative factor by any standard. In this connection, the T. H. 3 corridor plan (Alt. 5) provides less of a "bypass" capability than do the Pleasant Ave. corridor plans. With respect to the Midway district, the plans for Alternates 2, 3 and 5 are similar only if the Parkway concept for the Pleasant Ave. corridor in Alt. 5 starts after the connection to the Short Line occurs. If not, then Alt. 5 would have the effect of diverting truck traffic to Snelling and West 7th Avenues, which is a condition that the Short Line Road was designed to alleviate. In Dakota County, the differences are negligible between Alternates 2, 3 and 5. IV - 88 Social Costs. In terms of social costs, the Pleasant Ave. corridor Alternates affect residential properties in the City of St. Paul while the T. H. 3 corridor plan (Alt. 5) affects commercial -industrial properties. In Dakota County, Alt. 5 affects residential properties and park lands while Alternates 2 and 3 do not. The difficulty in evaluating social costs directly lies in the fact that the available data do not permit an accurate quantification of the cost that lack of improved mobility in the sector southwesterly of the City's C. B. D. entails. However, if a shift from the Pleasant Ave. corridor to the T. H. 3 corridor takes place, social costs will shift accordingly to Dakota County and to the City's commercial -industrial area near the East 7th St. - Lafayette Freeway intersection. In the event of such a shift, 2 considerations present themselves. The first is that new right-of-way acquisition is a necessity near East 7th St. in St. Paul and probable in the T. H. 3 corridor in Dakota County. The second is that a new time table for the proposed I-35E project will emerge (assuming a new corridor receives Federal approval). Note: The probable implementation timetable for the two routes favors the Pleasant Ave. corridor in St. Paul rather than the T. H. 3 route. The Pleasant Ave. corridor could have sections opening in 1975 with completion possible by 1977. The T. H. 3 route defies suggesting a definite completion date. Given the constraints of financing, design, investigations, right-of- way acquisitions and relocations, one is probably looking at a completion date of about 1982 or 5 years later than I-35E in the Pleasant Ave. corridor. IV - 89 3. ESTIMATED COSTS AND BENEFITS FOR ALTERNATES 2, 3, 4 AND 5 At this point of the analytical process, the data indicate that the Pleasant Ave. (Alt. 2, 3) and the T. H. 3 (Alt. 5) corridors are the primary ones deserving of further evaluation. In addition, it is the Consultant's opinion that the Shepard Road corridor justifies a final test with respect to costs and benefits. In transportation economics, the typical cost -benefit analysis compares the sum of all project costs and social costs against the sum of all use benefits. The project costs include the costs of design, construction, right-of-way, and all miscellaneous items. Difficult -to -evaluate Social costs (or benefits) relate to the socio-economic effects of a facility. User benefits are the sum of travel time savings, vehicle operating cost improvements, and accident reduction benefits. Of the 3 user benefit parameters noted, the Consultant has included travel time savings and accident reduction benefits only. The reasons for excluding vehicle operating cost improvements are two -fold. The first is the Consultant's desire to favor costs over benefits in the economic analyses to allow for a margin of error on the cost's side of the equation. Secondly, while data exist which indicate that vehicle operating cost savings are noticeable, data also exist which suggest that the magnitude of savings is small. (The latter data are the result of a 1968 study of the operations of the Seattle Freeway by J. W. Hall, et al. ) IV - 90 For use as a guide in estimating costs, Table IV-4 is a Consultant - estimated tabulation that gives freeway costs in 1972 dollars for urban, urbanizing metro county, and urban bridge (viaduct) applications. As Table IV-4 indicates, the urban viaduct sections represent the most costly form of construction. The estimated costs in Table IV-4 are for use in the cost -benefit analyses only when more definitive costs are not available. The estimated costs and benefits for proposed I-35E in the Pleasant Ave. (Alt. 2, 3), the Shepard Road (Alt. 4), and the T. H. 3 (Alt. 5) corridors appear in Tables IV-5, IV-6, IV-7, and IV-8 respectively. For consistency in the evaluation process, the data include costs and benefits of the City of St. Paul (Ramsey County) portions of the Alternates only. (This is a factor in the analysis of Alt. 5. ) All costs and benefits are in 1972 dollars. IV - 91 MINI INK = NM INK NM INN N E r NM NM OM ME MB a - MINI NMI URBAN 4-Lane 6-Lane 8-Lane URBANIZING METRO COUNTY 4-Lane 6-Lane 8-Lane URBAN BRIDGE OR VIADUCT SECTIONS 4-Lane 6-Lane 8-Lane TABLE IV - 4 TWIN CITY METROPOLITAN AREA FREEWAY COST ESTIMATES _ COSTS IN MILLIONS OF 1972 DOLLARS _ Design and Construction Right -of -Way Total Cost Cost Per Mile Cost Per Mile Per Mile 4. 8 - 5. 2 5. 4 - 6. 0 6. 0 - 6. 5 2. 9 - 3. 5 3.2 - 3.8 3. 5 - 4. 1 12.0 - 18.0 14. 0 - 20. 0 16.0 - 22.0 4. 5 - 6. 5 5. 0 - 7. 0 5.5 - 7.5 0.1-0.5 0.2 - 0.7 0. 3 - 0. 9 2.0 - 5.0 2.2 - 5.2 2.5 - 5.5 9.3 - 11.7 10. 4 - 13. 0 11.5 - 14.0 3.0-4.0 3.4 - 4. 5 3.8 - 5.0 14. 0 - 23. 0 16.2 - 25.2 18. 5 - 27. 5 NOTES: Estimated costs are based on the following assumptions: 1) Soil conditions encountered are normal and do not require extensive corrective measures. 2) Interchange Spacing -- 2 diamond interchanges per mile in urban areas; 1 interchange (1/2 clover leaf + 1/2 diamond) per mile in urbanizing metropolitan counties. 3) Upper limits of right-of-way costs can exceed those given if land acquired is commercial -industrial classification in its entirety. 4) Estimates prepared by Consultant using 1972 construction costs. TABLE IV - 5 ESTIMATED COSTS - BENEFITS FOR I-35E IN PLEASANT AVE. CORRIDOR Alternate 2 COSTS Project Costs - Design, Construction, Right -of - Way, Miscellaneous. (includes 7 houses at Pleasant Ave. ) Social Costs - Property Value Reduction I-94 Junction West 7th St. (includes) to I-94 Pennsylvania Junction Ave. work) $38, 200, 000 TOTAL $13,800,000 $52, 000, 000 $ 793,800 -- $ 793,800 Social Costs - Tax Revenue Losses for 20 years $ 530, 000 TOTAL COSTS Alt. 2 BENEFITS $39, 523, 800 $ 530,000 $13,800,000 $53, 323, 800 Time Savings of $2. 8 million per year for 20 years $56, 000, 000 Traffic Safety $300, 000 per year for 20 years $ 6,000,000 TOTAL BENEFITS Alt. 2 $62, 000, 000 Notes: 1. Benefits do not include $3, 000, 000 invested in C. B. D. on the basis that I-35E would be constructed. (See Appendix 1, Table S-13). 2. Traffic projections were reduced by 30% (to account for travel which would not be generated if I-35E were not available) before benefits were computed. The 30% figure is a high allowance in this case. 3. See pages I-77, I-78 for data on benefit computations. Although preceding analyses noted its environmental shortcomings, the data in Table IV-5 indicate that Alt2 benefits exceed its cost. IV - 93 TABLE IV - 6 ESTIMATED COSTS - BENEFITS FOR I-35E IN PLEASANT AVE. CORRIDOR Alternate 3 I- 94 Junction West 7th St. (includes to I-94 Pennsylvania COSTS Junction Ave. work) TOTAL Alternate 2 Project Costs $38, 200, 000 $13, 800, 000 $52, 000, 000 Modifications to Alt . 2 Add Cover Sections (82, 000 sq. ft. @ $40/sq. ft.) $ 3, 280, 000 $ 3, 280, 000 Add Noise Abatement Walls $ 120, 000 $ 120, 000 Along Pleasant Ave. (1200 ft. @ $100/ft) Add -Moving Cass Gilbert Church (Assumes Rebuilding) Deduct St. Clair Ave. Ramps (2500 lane-ft. @ $16/lane-ft. ) $ Social Costs -Property Value Reduction Social Costs -Tax Revenue Losses for 20 years 450, 000 - 40, 000 655, 500 $ 450, 000 $ - 40, 000 $ 655, 500 $ 426, 000 $ 426, 000 TOTAL COSTS $43, 091, 500 Alt. 3 BENE FITS $13, 800, 000 $56, 891, 500 Time Savings of $2. 63 million per year for 20 years $52, 600, 000 Traffic Safety - $27, 000 per year for 20 years $ 5, 400, 000 TOTAL BENEFITS $58, 000, 000 Alt. 3 IV - 94 The following notes apply to Table IV - 6. 1. Benefits do not include $3, 000, 000 invested in C. B. D. on the basis that I-35E would be constructed (See Appendix 1, Table S-13). 2. Traffic projections were reduced by 20% (to account for travel which would not be generated if I-35E were not available) before benefits were computed. 3. See pages I-77, I-78 for data on benefit computations. However, with respect to Table IV - 6, it is important to call attention to the cost item regarding the Cass Gilbert Church. Reference to the item indicates that the cost includes an estimate for reconstructing the building (if necessary). The amount given is likely to exceed the appraised cost of land plus building (1972 dollars). Because the Minnesota Department of Highways cannot pay more than the appraised value, additional funds from other than M. H. D. sources will be necessary. IV - 95 TABLE IV - 7 ESTIMATED COSTS - BENEFITS ON I-35E IN SHEPARD ROAD CORRIDOR (length = 6. 80 miles) Alternate 4 COSTS TOTAL Project Costs - Design, Construction, Right -of -Way, Miscellaneous. (Low -end estimate used) $135, 000, 000 TOTAL COSTS Alt. 4 $135, 000, 000 BENEFITS Time Savings of $1. 3 million per year for 20 years Traffic Safety - 10% of Time Savings TOTAL BENEFITS Alt. 4 $ 26, 200, 000 $ 2, 600, 000 $ 28, 600, 000 Costs. In 1972 dollars, right-of-way, design, construction, and other costs along Shepard Road would average between $20, 000, 000 and $25, 000, 000 per mile for a 4-lane viaduct. Because of difficult topography and the effects of inplace structures, these values are higher than the ones given in Table IV-4. Considering that the project length would be about 6. 8 miles, a second level I-35E along Shepard Road involves capital expenditures ranging from about $135 million to $170 million. The obvious question here is whether the amount of traffic served and other considerations (lack of environmental harm, etc. ) warrant such capital investments. Benefits. Using the figure of 10, 000 vehicles per day given in fig. 40, $2. 55 per vehicle -hour, and a speed differential of 25 mph with competing arterials, one notes the following: Annual Travel On Viaduct = 10, 000 veh. /day x 365 days x 6. 8 miles = 24, 820, 000 vehicle -miles per yr. Arterial St. Travel Time = 24, 820, 000 veh. -mi/25 mph = 992, 800 hrs/yr. Interstate Travel Time = 24, 820, 000 veh. -mi/50 mph = 496, 400 hrs/yr. Time Saving = 496, 400 vehicle -hours per year. Value of Time Saved = 496, 400 x $2. 55/veh. -hr. = $1, 270, 000 per year. IV - 96 On the basis of a no -discount rate approach, the annual savings of $1, 270, 000 per year would translate into 20-year totals of $25, 400, 000. As Table IV - 7 illustrates, the costs for I-35E in Alt. 4 exceed the benefits by a disparate margin (minimum of 4 to 1). The disparity is so great that there appears to be no chance of justifying the consideration of this Alternate any further unless there are redeeming social benefits. It is the Consultant's opinion that social benefits of the magnitudes needed to make Alt. 4 feasible do not exist. The foregoing is so despite the possibility raised by some that funds from the Federal Great Mississippi River Road Project, which would extend along the full length of the river, might be used on Alt. 4. Note: The 93rd Congress passed the Federal Highway Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-87) on August 13, 1973 authorizing the "development of a national scenic and recreational highway" along the Mississippi River. The authorization includes funding of $60 million to be divided between the 10 states through which the River passes. In addition, up to $30 million not otherwise appropriated by the Treasury may be applied to the Great River Road project. The total funding under the Act carries up through the end of the fiscal year ending on June 30, 1976. IV - 97 TABLE IV - 8 ESTIMATED COSTS - BENEFITS FOR I-35E IN T. H. 3 CORRIDOR (Ramsey County Portion Only) Alternate 5 COSTS TOTAL Project Costs - Design, Construction, Right -of - Way, Miscellaneous 1. 25 miles at $11 million/mile $13, 750, 000 Interchange Modifications East 7th Street $ 5,000,000 Parkway - Blvd. (3. 24 miles at $500, 000/mile) (Paving and Curbing Only) Connection to Fifth St. 0. 35 mile @ $175, 000/mile 150 ft. bridge @ $30/ sq. ft. $ 1,620,000 $ 61,000 $ 135,000 Connection Sixth St. 0. 20 mile @ $175, 000/mile $ 35, 000 Widen Lafayette Bridge by 2 lanes 80,000 sq. ft. @ $30/ sq. ft. $ 2,400,000 Investments to date in Link (Pleasant Ave. Corridor) $23, 600, 000 TOTAL COSTS Alt. 5 $46, 601, 000 BENEFITS Time Savings of $1 million per year for 20 years Traffic Safety - 10% of Time Saving for 20 years Eliminate Property Value Losses Pleasant Ave. Corridor (Alt. 2) $20, 000, 000 $ 2,000,000 $ 1,323,800 TOTAL BENEFITS Alt. 5 $23, 323, 800 IV - 98 The following notes apply to Table IV - 8: Costs. Consultant estimates for construction costs of construction costs of various roadway types in the Twin Cities Metropolitan area given in Table IV-4 have been used for the evaluation of costs in Alt. 5. The link of I-35E in Ramsey Co. for Alternative 5 is 3. 25 miles long. Since 2 miles have been constructed as part of the Lafayette expressway, it has not been included under costs. Benefits. Assuming 15, 000 vehicles per day diverted to this corridor, and using the 3. 25 mile length in Ramsey Co. , one gets 15, 000 v. p. d. x 365 days x 3. 25 miles = 18, 000, 000 veh. miles/year. Further, assuming speeds of 55 mph and 25 mph for freeways and arterials respectively, the travel time saving is: Arterial St. - Travel time = 18, 000, 000/25 mph = Freeway - Travel time = 18, 000, 000/55 mph = Travel Time Savings Per Year 720, 000 veh. hrs. 327, 000 veh. hrs. 393, 000 veh. hrs. Using $2. 55 per vehicle hour, the 393, 000 vehicle hours represents an annual savings of about $1, 000, 000. On a direct line basis with no discounts, this correlates to a 20-yr. savings of $20, 000, 000 in 1972 dollars. Traffic safety has been taken at 10% of travel time savings. The elimination of property value losses and the corresponding tax revenue losses in the Pleasant Ave. corridor are $793, 800 and $530, 000 respectively in Alt. 2. For Alt. 3, the figures are $655, 500 and $426, 000. Thus, Alt. 5 affects benefits in the Pleasant Ave. corridor of $1, 323, 800 (Alt. 2) and $1, 081, 500 (Alt. 3) respectively. (See Tables IV-5 and IV-6. ) The data in Table IV - 8 indicate that the total costs on the City of St. Paul portion of Alt. 5 exceed the total apparent benefits by a margin of about 2 to 1. Thus, Alt. 5 fails the test of economic soundness when evaluated as a competing link to the Pleasant Ave. corridor alternates. IV - 99 In summary, the cost -benefit analyses for Alternates 2, 3, 4, and 5 given in Tables IV-5, IV-6, IV-7, and IV-8 respectively indicate that benefit exceeds costs for Alternates 2 and 3 while the reverse is true with Alternates 4 and 5. Specifically, the Pleasant Ave. corridor alternates (Alt. 2, 3) exhibit benefit -to -cost ratios slightly over unity. In contrast, the Shepard Road corridor (Alt. 4) and the T. H. 3 corridor (Alt. 5) costs exceed benefits by the substantial margins of 4 to 1 and 2 to 1 respectively. Even with allowances for errors of omission, etc. , the data indicate that the Shepard Road and T. H. 3 corridors appear to be poor choices from an "economics" standpoint. IV - 100 4. CRITERIA SATISFACTION LEVET S With a review of the 6 criteria established for the evaluation process, it is now possible to arrive at a comparison for all of the Alternates excepting the Mass Transit alternate (Alt. 7). Table IV-9 depicts a composite score sheet reflecting how the 6 Alter- nates rate according to the evaluation criteria used. As it indicates, Alternates 1 and 6 do not satisfy any of the criteria. Despite an unrealistic allowance for full satisfaction of environmental factors, Alternates 4 and 5 satisfy 3 of 6 and 4 of 6 criteria respectively. Alt. 2 satisfies the 5 transpor- tation criteria but fails in the area of environmental factors. Alt. 3, with 1/2 credit given for a satisfaction of environmental factors, receives a rating of 5-1/2 out of 6. A word of caution at this point is necessary. It would be erroneous to assume that each of the 6 criteria are of equal significance, they are not. As stated earlier in Section IV, to a considerable extent Criterion 6 relating to the environment, stands separately from the preceding 5. Similarly, the valuations on Criterion 6 given in Table IV - 9 are subjective. In actuality, it would be difficult for any of the I-35E alternates to satisfy all areas of environmental concern fully. IV - 101 Criteria TABLE IV - 9 CRITERIA SATISFACTION COMPARISON ALT. 1 THROUGH ALT. 6 Do- Pleasant Pleasant Shepard T. H. Dakota Nothing Ave. Ave. Road 3 Co. 30 ALT. ALT, ALT. ALT. ALT. ALT. 1 2 3 4 5 6 1. Traffic Service x x 2. Conformance x x x x* 3. Rate of Return on Investment 4. Connection in Dakota Co. - x x x x 5. Short Line x x - x 6. Environment - - x/ 2 x x Totals 0 5 5-1/2 3 4 0 *Assumes modifications to general network can be made. Note: Please see page IV - 9 for the explanation of criteria applied. IV - 102 SECTION V SECTION 4(f) AND SECTION 106 LAND INVOLVEMENT 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 SECTION V - SECTION 4(f) AND SECTION 106 LAND INVOLVEMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS V-a V. SECTION 4(f) AND SECTION 106 LAND INVOLVEMENT V-1 - V-6 A. SECTION 4(f) INVOLVEMENT 1. Pleasant Ave. Corridor - Alt. 2, 3 2. Shepard Road Corridor - Alt. 4 3. T. H. 3 Corridor - Alt. 5 V-1 V-3 V-3 V-3 B. SECTION 106 INVOLVEMENT V-4 1. Pleasant Ave. Corridor - Alt. 2, 3 V-6 2. Shepard Road Corridor - Alt. 4 V-6 3. T. H. 3 Corridor - Alt. 5 V-6 1 V - a SECTION V - SECTION 4(f) AND SECTION 106 LAND INVOLVEMENT Throughout this Report, there have been references to Section 4(f) and Section 106 lands. In this connection, there was the implication that these lands were of special significance. In actuality, the Sections are from laws dealing with 1) publicly owned parklands, etc. , and 2) the preservation of historic sites. The first, Section 4(f) is from the Department of Transportation (D. O. T. ) Act of 1966, as amended in 1968. The second, Section 106 is from the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. A. SECTION 4(f) INVOLVEMENT Section 4(f) of the D. O. T Act mentioned above specifies that the Secretary of Transportation shall not approve any program or project which requires the use of any publicly owned land from a public park, recreation area, or wildlife and water -fowl refuge of National, State or local significance or any land from an historic site of National, State or local significance, unless 1) there is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use of such land, and 2) such program includes all possible planning to minimize harm to such land resulting from the project. For Federally funded highway projects which contemplate the use of lands covered under Section 4(f), it is necessary to prepare a Section 4(f) Statement for attachment to the environmental impact statement or to a negative declaration. This statement requires transmittal for comment to the Departments of the Interior, Housing and Urban Development, and the local, State or V - 1 Federal agencies that have jurisdiction over the lands. This statement must detail the effect of the project on the 4(f) land and it must include specific information to support the determination that there is no feasible or prudent alternative to the use of that land. It must also in- clude information to demonstrate that all possible planning to minimize harm has been or will be included in the project proposal. This statement and all comments received in response to circulation of the statement, are submitted to the Secretary of Transportation, who has respon- sibility for its approval or rejection. Note: In addition to the review processes required under D. O. T. Act Sec. 4(f), if the property affected is a historic site which is listed in the National Register of Historic Places, or is eligible for listing in the National Register, the provisions of Sec. 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 must also be satisfied. 1. Pleasant Ave. Corridor - Alt. 2, 3 Reference to Section I (Table I-3a, I-3b) and to Section II (Parks and Playgrounds) indicates that the Minnesota Department of Highways has already acquired right-of-way from one public park and two playgrounds for proposed I-35E construction in the Pleasant Ave. corridor. Specifically, the acquisitions have consisted of 0. 005 acres from Cathedral Park, 0. 02 and 0. 09 acres from the Jefferson and Lindsay School playgrounds respectively. Appendix 7 includes a resolution (C. F. 257626) by the City Council of St. Paul and correspondence on behalf of the St. Paul Board of Education to the Gity's Chief Engineer reflecting their opinions that the lands acquired were not of National, State, or local significance. 2. Shepard Road Corridor - Alt. 4 It appears that proposed I-35E construction in the Shepard Road corridor would not involve any Section 4(f) lands. 3. T. H. 3 Corridor - Alt. 5 The T. H. 3 corridor passes through a major park, Kaposia Park. If, as appears likely, construction of proposed I-35E in the T. H. 3 corridor requires the acquisition of additional right-of-way from the park, there would definitely be Section 4(f) involvement. V - 3 B. SECTION 106 INVOLVEMENT The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 created the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, as an independent agency of the Federal Government, for the protection of properties listed in the National Register of Historic Places. The members of the Advisory Council are the Secretaries of 1) Interior, 2) Housing and Urban Development, 3) Treasury, 4) Commerce, 5) Transportation, 6) Agriculture, 7) The Attorney General, 8) the Admini- strator of the General Services Administration, 9) Secretary of the Smith- sonian Institute, 10) the Chairman of the National Trust for Historic Preserva- tion, and ten citizen members. The Act authorizes the Council to review and comment upon undertakings carried out, licensed or financially assisted by the Federal Government, which have an effect upon properties listed on the National Register, to recommend measures to coordinate activities of Federal, State and local agencies, and private institutions and individuals relating to historic preservation, and to secure from the appropriate Federal agencies information necessary to the performance of those duties. Section 106 of the Historic Preservation Act establishes procedures to be followed where there is involvement of a project with historic districts, sites, buildings, structures and objects which are listed in the National Register of Historic Places. In addition, Presidential Executive Order 11593 of May 13, 1971 stipulate that properties which are considered eligible for listing in the V - 4 National Register are to be afforded the same protection as those which are listed. As a result, the Minnesota Highway Department, the Federal Highway Administration and the Minnesota Historical Society review highway projects for possible involvement with historic districts, sites or properties. Upon finding involvement, the State Historic Preservation Officer, the Federal Highway Administration, and the Minnesota Highway Department consult for the purpose of applying the "Criteria for Effect. " Upon applying the "Criteria for Effect, " one of the following determinations will be made. A. No effect B. Effect established (no adverse effect) C. Effect established (adverse effect) If applying the "Criteria for Effect" results in a determination of no effect, a memorandum of agreement will be signed by the Federal Highway Administration, the State Historic Preservation Officer, and the Minnesota Highway Department, and the proposal may proceed. If applying the criteria for effect results in a finding that the undertaking will have an effect upon a National Register property, then consultation between the State Historic Preservation Officer, the Federal Highway Administration Division Engineer, and the Executive Director of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation is necessary to determine whether or not the effect will be adverse. V - 5 1. Pleasant Ave. Corridor - Alt. 2, 3 Reference to Section I (fig. 12) and to Section II (Historic Sites) indicates that proposed I-35E in the Pleasant Ave. corridor is near an area designated as an Historical Hill District by the Minnesota State Legislature in 1973. The District includes 2 buildings - The James J. Hill and the Burbank -Livingston - Griggs Houses - listed in The National Register of Historic Places. In addition, the Consultant has called for the preservation of a building not in the District - the German Presbyterian Church which Cass Gilbert, a famous Minnesota Architect, designed in 1890. The church is situated adjacent to current I-35E right-of-way limits. Proposed I-35E in this corridor should not affect 3 other sites listed in The National Register of Historic Places in Ramsey County - the Old Federal Courts Bldg, , the Alexander Ramsey House, and Irvine Park. Z. Shepard Road Corridor - Alt. 4 The indications are that proposed I-35E in the Shepard Road corridor is likely to affect the Alexander Ramsey House and Irvine Park more so than the other Alternates. 3. T. H. 3 Corridor - Alt. 5 Alternate 5 should have no Section 106 involvement. V - 6 SECTION VI 1 I BIBLIOGRAPHY 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 VI. BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. Air Quality Manual No. 1, "Meteorology and Its Influence on the Dispersion of Pollutants from Highway Line Sources, " State of California, Division of Highways, April 1972. 2. Air Quality Manual No. 2, "Motor Vehicle Emission Factors for Estimates of Highway Impact on Air Quality, " State of California, Division of Highways, April 1972. 3. Air Quality Manual No. 3, "Traffic Information Requirements for Estimates of Highway Impact on Air Quality, " State of California, Division of Highways, April 1972. 4. Air Quality Manual No. 4, "Mathematical Approach to Estimating Highway Impact on Air Quality, " State of California, Division of Highways, July 1972. 5. Air Quality Manual No. 5, "Analysis of Ambient Air Quality for Highway Projects, " State of California, Division of Highways, July 1972. 6. Air Quality Manual No. 6, "A Method for Analyzing and Reporting Highway Impact on Air Quality, " State of California, Division of Highways, July 1972. 7. Altshuler, A. A. , "The City Planning Process, " Cornell University Press, 1965. 8. Berland, T. , "The Fight for Quiet, " Prentice -Hall, 1970. 9. "Building Incentives for Drivers to Ride, " Report by Citizens League, March 21, 1973. 10. Burns, W. , "Noise and Man, " J. B. Lippincott Co. , 1969. 11. Campbell, M. E. , "The Energy Outlook for Transportation in the United States, " Traffic Quarterly, ENO Foundation for Transportation, April 1973. 12. "1970 Census of Housing, " Block Statistics, Minneapolis -St. Paul, Minn. Urbanized Area, U.S. Bureau of the Census, August 1971. 13. "1970 Census of Population, " Minneapolis -St. Paul, Minn. Urbanized Area, U.S. Bureau of the Census, August 1971. VI - 1 14. "Costs and Benefits of Transportation Planning, " National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 106, Highway Research Board, 1970. 15. "Economic and Social Effects of Highways, Summary and Analysis, " U.S. Department of Transportation (FHWA), 1972. 16. "Fundamentals of Noise: Measurement, Rating Schemes, and Standards, " Report NTID. 300. 15, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, December 31, 1971. 17. Hall, J. W. , Sawhill, R. B. and J. H. Matteson, "User Benefits in Economic Analysis of Metropolitan Freeway Construction, " Highway Research Record 314, 1970. 18. "Highway Capacity Manual, " Highway Research Board, National Academy of Sciences, 1965. 19. "Highway Noise, A Design Guide for Highway Engineers, " National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 117, Highway Research Board, 1971. 20. "Highway Noise: Measurement, Simulation and Mixed Reactions, " National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 78, Highway Research Board, 1969. 21. "Implementation Plan to Achieve Carbon Monoxide Ambient Air Quality Standards, " Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Report to U. S. Environ- mental Protection Agency, May 1973. 22. Jacobs, M. B. , "The Chemical Analysis of Air Pollutants, " Interscience Publishers, Inc. , 1960. 23. Kryter, K. D. , "The Effects of Noise on Man, " Academic Press, 1963. 24. Larsen, R. I. , "A Mathematical Model for Relating Air Quality Measure- ments to Air Quality Standards, " U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, November 1971. 25. Leavitt, H. , "Superhighway - Superhoax, " Doubleday, 1970. 26. "Major Diversified Centers, Policies, System Plan, Program, " Metro- politan Development Guide, Metropolitan Council, February 1971. 27. Manheim, M. L. and J. H. Suhrbier, "Incorporating Social and Environmental Factors in Highway Planning and Design, " Professional Paper 72-8, M. I. T. Urban Systems Laboratory, July 1972. VI- 2 28. Miller, J. D. , "Effects of Noise on People, " Report NTID300. 7, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, December 31, 1971. 29. Mumford, L. , "The City in History, " Harcourt, Brace and World, 1961. 30. Mumford, L. , "The Urban Prospect, " Harcourt, Brace and World, 1968. 31. "Office Space: An Inventory and Forecast for the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area, " Metropolitan Council, June 1973. 32. Peranio, A. , "Conceptualization and Use of Road Safety and Traffic Engineering Formulas, " Traffic Quarterly, ENO Foundation for Transpor- tation, July 1971. 33. "A Policy on Geometric Design of Rural Highways, " 1965, American Association of State Highway Officials (AASHO), Fifth Printing, 1969. 34. "Preliminary Design Report for Traffic Noise Barriers, I-35W at Minnehaha Parkway, Minneapolis, " Minnesota Department of Highways, August 1971. 35. Rae, J. B. , "The Mythology of Urban Transportation, " Traffic Quarterly, ENO Foundation for Transportation, January 1972. 36. "I-35E Ramp Metering, " Office of Traffic Engineering Report No. 07-121, Minnesota Department of Highways, January 1971. 37. Rupert, H. M. , "Noise Standards for Federal Highways, " Paper Presented at Fifth Summer Meeting of Highway Research Board, August 1972. 38. Savery, W. C. , "Future Energy Sources for Transportation, " Traffic Quarterly, ENO Foundation for Transportation, October 1972. 39. Shannon and Wilson, Inc. , "Pleasant Avenue Test Cut, " Report to Minnesota Department of Highways, January 1970. 40. Shannon and Wilson, Inc. , "Slope Stability Investigation, Vicinity of the St. Paul Capitol Interchange, St. Paul, Minnesota, " Report to Minnesota Department of Highways, September 1970. 41. Shannon and Wilson, Inc. , "Supplementary Report No. 1, Study of Slope Stability, T. H. 35E in Vicinity of Archdiocese Chancery, Childrens Hospital and Oakland Wall, St. Paul, Minnesota, " Report to Minnesota Department of Highways, February 5, 1975. VI- 3 42. "Strategies for the Evaluation of Alternative Transportation Plans, " National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 96, Highway Research Board, 1970. 43. "A summary Report of Travel in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area, " Metropolitan Council, April 1974. 44. "Summit Hill Community, A Statistical Analysis, " Report by St. Paul Housing and Redevelopment Authority, May 1972. 45. "The Economic Impact of Noise, " Report NTID. 300. 14, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, December 31, 1971. 46. "The Economic Impact of the Freeways on the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area, " Report for Minnesota Department of Highways by North Star Research and Development Institute, February 6, 1971. 47. "The Social Impact of Noise, " Report NTID 300. 11, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, December 31, 1971. 48. Thibeault, R. W. , Kaiser, E. J. , Butler, E. G. , and R. J. McAllister, "Accessibility Satisfaction, Income, and Residential Mobility, " Traffic Quarterly, ENO Foundation for Transportation, April 1973. 49. Thomas, T. C. and G. I. Thompson, "The Value of Time for Commuting Motorists as a Function of Their Income Level and Amount of Time Served, " Highway Research Record 314, 1970. 50. Towne, Robin M. and Associates and D. C. Steel, Real Estate Consultant, "Noise in Hospitals Located Near Freeways, " Report for U.S. Department of Commerce, January 1964. 51. "Traffic Engineering Handbook, " J. E. Boerwald, Editor, Institute of Traffic Engineers, 3rd Edition, 1965. 52. "Transit Development Program, 1973-1990; Policies, Plans, Programs, " Metropolitan Transit Commission, January 31, 1973 Revision. 53. "Transportation Noise and Its Control, " U.S. Department of Transportation P5630. 1, June 1972. 54. "Transportation, Policies, System Plan, Program, " Metropolitan Development Guide, Metropolitan Council, Draft for Public Hearing of January 13, 1971. VI - 4 1 55. Veneklasen, Paul S. and Associates, "Highway Vibration Study for United Hospitals Medical Complex in Relation to Proposed Extension of Interstate 35E, " Report by Associate J. C. Ortega for Ellerbe Architects, 22 August, 1974. 56. Veneklasen, Paul S. and Associates, "Noise Control for United Hospitals Medical Complex in Relation to Proposed Extension of Interstate Highway 35E, " Report for Ellerbe Architects, 31 July 1972. 57. "Water Pollution Aspects of Urban Runoff, "Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, U.S. Department of the Interior, January 1969. 58. Weber, R. L. , White, M. W. and K. V. Manning, "College Physics, " McGraw - Hill, 1959. 59. Wohl, M. and B. V. Martin, "Traffic Systems Analysis for Engineers and Planners, "McGraw-Hill, 1967. IiIMOCC S f APPENDIX 1 APPENDIX 2 APPENDIX 3 APPENDIX 4 APPENDIX 5 APPENDIX 6 APPENDIX 7 APPENDIX 8 APPENDICES SURVEY OF CITY OF SAINT PAUL CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT LEADERS REGARDING PROPOSED I-35E PRESENTATION ON INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 35E FROM WEST SEVENTH STREET TO THE CAPITOL APPROACH COMPLEX BY WILLIAM C. MERRITT, CHIEF ENGINEER, DISTRICT 9, MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS PRELIMINARY STATEMENT BY RESIDENTS IN PROTEST OVER I-35E (RIP 35E) STATEMENTS AND/OR RESOLUTIONS BY CITY OF SAINT PAUL ORGANIZATIONS REGARDING PROPOSED I-35E STATEMENTS AND/OR RESOLUTIONS BY DAKOTA COUNTY PUBLIC BODIES REGARDING PROPOSED I-35E STATEMENT BY UNITED HOSPITALS, INC. REGARDING THEIR CONCERN ABOUT NOISE POLLUTION, VIBRATION, AND AIR POLLUTION FROM PROPOSED I-35E RESOLUTIONS AND CORRESPONDENCE REGARDING PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS AFFECTED BY PROPOSED I-35E (WEST 7TH STREET TO CAPITOL APPROACH COMPLEX) UNITED STATES CENSUS DATA, 1950 - 1970 FOR CENSUS TRACTS NEAR PROPOSED I-35E IN SAINT PAUL A. 1- 1 - A. 1- 34 A. 2-1 - A. 2-4 A. 3-1 - A. 3-27 A. 4-1 - A. 4-5 A. 5-1 - A. 5-16 A. 6-1 - A. 6-7 A. 7-1 - A. 7- 5 A. 8-1 - A.8-28 APPENDIX 9 AIR QUALITY AND WATER QUALITY DATA A. 9-1 - A. 9-8 A-1 f 1 1 I 1 1 t 1 1 APPENDIX 1 SURVEY OF CITY OF SAINT PAUL CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT LEADERS REGARDING PROPOSED I-35E A.1 -1 A. 1- 1 - A. 1-34 mid-continent surveys minneapolis, minnesota SURVEY METHOD THE TABLES OF DATA THAT FOLLOW ARE BASED UPON A PERSONAL INTERVIEW SURVEY OF ONE HUNDRED FOUR LEADERS OF FIRMS AND OFFICES LOCATED IN DOWNTOWN ST. PAUL. THE QUESTIONNAIRE FORM WAS DESIGNED BY THE STAFF OF MID—CONTINENT SURVEYS, INC. IN CONSULTATION WITH THE STAFF OF THE WALTER BUTLER ENGINEERING COMPANY., QUOTAS FOR SEVEN BUSINESS CATEGORIES WERE SPECIFIED BY THE WALTER BUTLER ENGINEERING COMPANY THE QUOTAS AND NUMBER OF INTERVIEWS COMPLETED ARE AS FOLLOWS: BUSINESS CATEGORY QUOTA COMPLETED RETAIL 25 25 FINANCE AND INSURANCE 20 20 BUSINESS OFFICES 20 20 LEGAL 20 20 ENTERTAINMENT 10 10 PROPERTY £ BUILDING MANAGEMENT 5 5 MEDICAL 10 4 110 104 A.1-2 mid-continent surveys minneapolis, minnesota ALL SAMPLES, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE MEDICAL SAMPLE, WERE SYSTEMATICALLY SELECTED FROM THE 1972 MEMBERSHIP DIRECTORY AND BUYERS` GUIDE PUBLISHED BY THE SAINT PAUL AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. THE MEDICAL SAMPLE WAS SELECTED FROM 7HE YELLOW PAGES OF THE JUNE, 1972 SAINT PAUL TELEPHONE DIRECTORY. INTERVIEWING WAS COMPLETED BETWEEN MARCH 5, 1973 AND MARCH 13, 1973; THE RESULTING DATA WAS CODED, KEYPUNCHED, AND INCORPORATED INTO THE FOLLOWING TABLES BY THE STAFF OF MID—CONTINENT SURVEYS, INC, A.1-3 mid-continent surveys minneapolis, minnesota THE SAMPLE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE TOLLOWING FIRMS WERE INCLUDED IN THE SURVEY RETAIL THE. APOTHECARY SHOP BORGE & POWERS FURNITURE BURT'S SHOES R. N. CARDOZO & BROS,, INC, DAY TONS DONALDSON'S ELVGREN PAINT & PLy FIELD—SCHLICK FINN'S CAMERAS GOKEY COMPANY GOODMAN'S JEWELERS LIEMANDT'S FRANK MURPH`; NEUMANS PECK & PECK. PEDRO'S LUGGAGE ROBINSONS MEN WEAR SCHUMEISTER'S FURNITURE, INC, C. J, SILVER JEWELERS THEODORE'S THOM MCAN SHOE STORE THREE SISTERS HUBERT W, WHITE WOOLWORTH YOUNG QUIN-!'=N UP mid-continent surveys minneapolis, minnesoto FINANCE AND INSURANCE AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK & TRUST COMPANY CALDWELL—PHILLIPS, INC. COMMERCIAL STATE BANK DAIN KALMAN & QUAIL, INC. FARM CREDIT BANKS OF ST, PAUL FIRST FEDERAL SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOCIATION THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF ST, PAUL GAMBLES CONTINENTAL BANK JURAN & MOODY, INC. MERRILL LYNCH, PIERCE, FENNER & SMITH MIDWEST FEDERAL SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOCIATION THE MILWAUKEE COMPANY MINNESOTA FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN NORTHERN FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN PAINE, WEBBER, JACKSON & CURTIS, INC. PIPER, JAFFRAY & HOPWOOD THE ST. PAUL COMPANIES, INC, SPRINGSTED, INC, TWIN CITY FEDERAL SAVINGS & LOAN WALSTON & COMPANY BUSINESS OFFICES AMERICAN LINE SUPPLY COMPANY BUCKBEE MEARS COMPANY BUTWIN SPORTSWEAR COMPANY BURLINGTON NORTHERN, INC, CATHOLIC AID ASSOCIATION ECONOMICS LABORATORY, INC. ERICKSON PRINTING COMPANY THE GILLETTE COMPANY, TONI DIVISION GREAT NORTHERN IRON ORE PROPERTIES GULF OIL COMPANY IDEAL SECURITY HARDWARE CORP. LADY FAIR, INC. BUSINESS OFFICES (CONTINUED) LUNDGREN & ASSOC., MARSH & MCLE.NNAN, INC- MASON PUBLISHING COMPANY NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE ST PAUL ABSTRACT & TITLE ST. PAUL BOOK & STATIONARY SAINT PAUL DISPATCH & PIONEER WEST PUBLISHING COMPANY LEGAL PRESS ALTMAN, GERAGHTY, LEONARD & MULALLY AXELROD, CINCERA, DONOHUE & MARILLEY Bi? I GGS & MORGAN DANNA, HENNINGS, GILSDORF & JOHNSON DOHERTr'Y , RUMBLE & BUTLER DUDLEY, SMITH, COP ELAND & BELISLE FAHLGREN & HARTFELDT FALLON, FARICY, GREEN, BADDIS & WOLF KELLY & O'NEILL LAIS, BANNIGAN, CERISI LEVIN & R.OHLEDER LTD, MAGISTAD & NOONAN MERCHANT• & GOULD MOORE COSTELLO, & HART NAHURSHI & CYPTAR O'NEILL, BURKE & O'NEILL PETERSON, BELL & CONVERSE PETERSON, PETERSON & PETERSON SHEETS, GREENSTEIN, CUTTING & NEAL STRYKER AND JACOBSON r mid-continent surveys minneapolis, minnesota mid-continent surveys minneapolis, minnesota ENTERTAINMENT CAPP TOWERS MOTOR HOTEL AND FIRE HOUSE RESTAURANT ERNIE'S COCKTAIL BAR BOB GALLIVAN'S BAR & RESTAURANT HELLO DOLLY HOTEL SAINT PAUL LUIGI'S BAR METRO LOUNGE ST, PAUL CIVIC CENTER SAINT PAUL HILTON SMUGGLERS COVE RESTAURANT PROPERTY AND BUILDING MANAGEMENT CLAPP—THOMSSEN COMPANY DAVIDSON COMPANY KELLOGG SQUARE COMPANY LOWRY MEDICAL ARTS BUILDING OFFICE H & VAL J- ROTHSCHILD, INC. 1 t t t t INTERSTATE 35E STUDY - TABLE S-1 Ql. LOOKING AHEAD FIVE YEARS FROM NOW, WHAT 00 YOU EXPECT DOWNTOWN ST. PAUL WILL BE LIKE? PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL : INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAINMENT BLDG. MGMT. MEDICAL GENERALLY FAVORABLE RESPONSE ,63% 60% 80S .65♦ 50% 80% 60% 25% GENERALLY NEUTRAL RESPONSE 25 20 15 20 45 10 40 50 GENERALLY UNFAVORABLE RESPONSE 12 20 5 15 , 5 10 25 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% BASE FOR PERCENTAGES (104) (25) (20) (20) (20) (10) (5) (4) DETAILED RESPONSES PRESENTED ON FOLLOWING TABLE. INTERSTATE 35E STUDY - TABLE S-2 Q1. LOOKING AHEAD FIVE YEARS FROM NOW, WHAT DO YOU EXPECT DOWNTOWN ST. PAUL WILL BE LIKE? PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL F INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAINMENT BLDG. MGMT. MEDICAL GROW C IMPROVE/BIGGER G BETTER/DYNAMIC GROWING TOWN 50% 44% 65% 55% 30% 80% 40% 25% LESS RETAILING/NO RETAIL/ GHOST TOWN FOR RETAILERS 11 24 15 10 POPULATED WITH MORE APARTMENTS, HOTELS AND BUSINESSES 10 12 10 10 15 PRIMARILY OFFICE BUILDINGS/BANKS 1 PARKING RAMPS 9 4 20 15 5 MORE PEOPLE IN RETAIL BUSINESS/LARGER RETAIL AREA 8 24 - 5 - 20 MORE ENTERTAINMENT 5 8 5 5 5 - DEPENDS ON THE FREEWAY SYSTEM 5 - 10 5 10 20 - IT WILL BE A MORGUE 4 8 - - 10 - 25 MORE RESIDENTIAL 2 5 - 20 - LARGE DEPARTMENT STORES WILL BE HERE 2 - 5 5 SINGLE RESPONSES 4 8 5 - 20 NOT MUCH DIFFERENT DON'T KNOW BASE FOR PERCENTAGES M MULTIPLE RESPONSE 9 4 5 - 30 25 _2_ 5 15 25 124%3 136%0 1300^ 1204," 1101"" 100% 1201^ 1001 (104) (25) (20) (20) (20) (10) (5) (4) A.1-8 INTERSTATE 35E STUDY - TABLE 5-3 Q2, THINKING ABOUT YOUR OWN bUSINESS SITUATION FOR A MOMENT. DO YOU EXPECT IT TO BE LOCATED IN DOWNTOWN ST. PAUL FIVE TEARS FROM NOW, OR NOT? PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL 6 INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAINMENT bLDG. MGMT, MED!CAl. YES • u: EXPECT TO BE DOWNIC�N ST. PAUL 86% 76% 211 201 211 221 100% 25% EMPLOYEES MORE 48 32 70 40 65 40 60 FEWER 4 - - 15 5 - - - SAME 33 40 25 35 20 50 40 25 DON'T KNOW 1 4 - - - - - - QUARTERS LARGER 32 8 35 30 70 30 20 - SMALLER 2 4 - 5 - - - SAME 51 60 60 55 20 60 80 25 DON'T KNOW 1 4 - - - - - - SALES OR GROSS INCOME MORE 73 60 85 75 80 70 100 25 LESS 1 4 - - - - - - SAME 7 4 10 10 5 10 DON'T KNOW 5 8 - 5 5 10 NO - DO NOT EXPECT TO BE DOWNTOWN ST. PAUL 14% 24% 10% 10% 10, 7 BASE FOR PERCENTAGES (104) (25) (20) (20) (20) (10) (5) (4) INTERSTATE 35E STUDY - TABLE S-4 Q2A. WHERE 00 YOU EXPECT IT TO BE LOCATED? Q2B. WHAT ARE SOME OF THE REASONS FOR LEAVING DOWNTOWN 5T. PAUL? NO - DO NOT EXPECT TO BE DOWNTOWN ST. PAUL PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL 6 INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAINMENT BLDG. MGMT. MEDICAL 14% 24% 11 10% 10% 1D% � 1 EXPECT TO BE LOCATED SUBURBAN/OUTLYING AREA 10 24 5 10 10 - SHOPPING CENTER 3 4 - - 50 RETIRED/OUT OF METRO AREA 2 - 5 25 DON'T KNOW 1 5 - REASONS FOR LEAVING DOWN TOMN LACK OF BUSINESS 5 20 - - LACK OF PARKING 5 12 5 10 - H1GH RENT 3 - 5 5 - - 25 RETIRED/OUT OF METRO AREA 2 5 - - 25 SINGLE RESPONSES 4 4 5 5 - 25 YES - DO ExPECT 70 BE DOWNTOWN 5T. PAUL 86% L 123. .19A 9.21 20: 1001 121 BASE FOR PERCENTAGES (104) (25) (20) (20) (20) (10) (5) (4) NOTE: MULTIPLE RESPONSE A.1- 9 INTERSTATE 3SE STUDY - TABLE 5-5 (PART 1) Q3, NOW THINKING A1OUT THE FREEWAY SYSTEM, IN GENERAL, DO YOU THINK THAT THE FREEWAY SYSTEM HAS BEEN GOOD FOR DUWNTJWN ST. PAUL, OR NOT? WHY 00 YOU SAY THAT? YES - GOOD PERCENTAGE DISTRISOTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY, SAMPLE RETAIL C INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAINMENT BLDG. MGMT. MEDICAL 721 64% 811 /RA 60i BO% B01 25% BETTER/EASY ACCESS/ EASIER TO GET IN AND OUT OF DOWNTOWN 30 28 40 35 25 40 FACILITATES TRANSPORTATION FROM OUTLYING AREAS/3RINGS IN PEOPLE FROM ALL OVER 18 20 20 5 15 40 20 25 5PEFDS UP GETTING DOWNTOWN/EXPEDITES TRAFFIC FLOW 17 12 25 25 15 20 EASIER TO COM',,TE BETWEEN THE TWO CITIES 16 12 10 30 15 60 CLEANED UP SOME TRASHY AREAS 1 - 5 - NO - NOT GOOD ill 161 lot 10E 30% 10% 20% DON'T KNOW/NO ANSWER 4% _ L 10t 10! _ BASE FOR PERCENTAGES (104) (25) (20) (20) (20) (10) (5) (4) NOTE: MULTIPLE RESPONSE DETAILED RESPONSES FOR "NO - NOT G000" ON FOLLOWING TABLE. Q3. (CONTINUED) NO - NOT G000 INTERSTATE 35E STUDY - TABLE 5-5 (PART 2) PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL L INS. OFFICES LEGAL TA R:MENT BLDG MGMT. MEDIC-_ 23% 36% 10% 10% 30% 10't 20% 75% MAKES SUBURBAN SHOPPING CENTERS AS ACCESSIBLE 12 20 5 10 10 20 25 NOT ENOUGH EXITS/ EXITS POORLY DESIGNED 6 4 5 10 10 - 25 PARKING IS POOR DOWNTOWN 3 12 - - - EASY TO by -PASS ST. PAUL AND GO TO MINNEAPOLIS 2 8 - - SINGLE RESPONSES 4 - 5 10 25 NO ANSWER 2 4 - 5 BASE FOR PERCENTAGES NOTE: MULTIPLE RESPONSE (104) (25) (20) (20) (20) (10) (5) (4) A.1-10 INTERSTATE 35E STUDY - TABLE 5-6 Q4. NOW TALCING ABOUT ONE PART OF THE FREEWAY SYSTEM THAT 15 ;TILL IN THE PLANNING STAGE ... INTERSTATE 35-E. HERE IS A MAP SHOWING THE ROUTE OF INTERSTATE 35-E AS IT WAS ORIGINALLY PROPOSED. SINCE THAT ROUTING WAS ANNOUNCED, HAVE ANi PLANS OR DECISIONS BEEN MADE ABOUT YOUR BUSINESS SITUATION THAT WIRE INFLUENCED, 1N ANY WAY, BY THE PROPOSED POUTING? NO YES xx BASE FOR PERCENTAGES xx PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL & INS OFFICES LEGAL TAIT,MENT BEDS. MGMT. MEDICAL 97% 100% 95% 95% 100% . 100% 80% 100% 3 5 5 20 (104) (25) (20) (20) (20) (10) (5) (4) THE THREE RESPONDENTS WHO INDICATED THAT THEIR FIRMS HAD MADE PLANS OR DECISIONS THAT WERE INFLUENCED BY THE PROPOSED ROUTING OF INTERSTATE 35-E WERE ASKED ABOUT THOSE PLANS AND THE EXPENDITURES THAT HAD BEEN AND WOULD BE EXPECTED TO BE MADE AS A RESULT OF THE PLANS. THOSE RESPONSES ARE AS FOLLOWS: FINANCE: PLANS - "WHERE TO LOCATE PEOPLE COMING INTO OFFICE - NEW OFFICE PERSONNEL BUYING HOMES NEAR AREA TO BE SERVED BY THIS ROUTE." EXPENDITURES -'DE - "NONE." EX'ENDI'IRES EXPECTED - "NONE." BUSINESS OFFICES: PLATS - "I THINK THE WHOLE COMMJNITY INVESTED TO BRING THE SOUTHERN AREA INTO DOWNTOWN." EXPENDITURES M=DE - "NONE." EXPENDITURES EXPECTED - "I JUST DON'T KNOW, OUR BUSINESS IS RIGHT IN THE AREA ANYWAY." PROPERTY/BLDG. MGMT.: PLANS - "HELPED DECISIONS FOR HOME OWNERS, WHETHER TO SPEND MONEY TO FIX UP IMPROVE BECAUSE FREEWAYS MAKE PROPERTY MORE VALUABLE." EXPENDITURES MADE - "CAN'T MEASURE." EXPENDITURES EXPECTED - "DON'T KNOW." INTERSTATE 35E STUDY - TABLE S-7 Q5. IN YOUR OPINION, IF I35-E WERE COMPLETED ALONG THAT ROUTE (CORRIDOR A/PLEASANT AVENUE), HOW WOULD IT AFFECT DOWNTOWN ST. PAUL? PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL C INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAINMENT BLDG. MGMT. MEDICAL GENERALLY FAVORABLE RESPONSES 66% 60% 80% 75• 75% 40% 80% GENERALLY NEUTRAL RESPONSES 8 4 5 10 30 20 GENERALLY UNFAVORABLE RESPONSES 9 4 10 15 75% NOT AFFECT DOWNTOWN 17 32 15 _a_ 10 30 -al- 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100• 100% 100% BASE FOR PERCENTAGES (104) (25) (20) (20) (20) (10) (5) (4) DETAILED RESPONSES PRESENTED ON FOLLOWING TABLE. A.1-11 INTERSTATE 35E STUDY - TABLE 5-8 CO. IN YOUR OPINION, IF I35-E WERE COMPLETED ALONG THAT ROUTE (CORRIDOR A/PLEASANT AVENUE), HOW WOULD IT AFFECT DOWNTOWN ST. PAUL? PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL g INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAINMENT BLDG. MGMT, MEDICAL WOULD HELP/BE BENEFICIAL/ POSITIVELY IMPROVE 23% 16% 45% 10% 45% - - BRING IN TRAFFIC/BRING MORE PEOPLE DOWNTOWN/ HAVE MORE ACTIVITY 21 20 20 30 10 10% 80% MORE ACCESSIBLE FROM A DIFFERENT ANGLE/MAKE IT MORE ACCESSIBLE FROM THE SOUTH 17 24 5 25 20 20 AFFECT THE TRAFFIC FLOW/ TAKE LESS TIME TO GET DOWNTOWN 9 4 15 15 - 10 20 AFFECT DOWNTOWN ADVERSELY 4 - 15 25% INCREASE TRAFFIC CONGESTION 3 4 5 25 DESTROY HOSPITALS 2 - - - 50 SINGLE NEGATIVE RESPONSES 2 10 - - DON'T KNOW 5 - - 5 - 30 20 NOT AFFECT DOWNTOWN 17 32 15 5 10 30 25 103%1 100% 100% 105%1 100% 100% 120t1 125%1 BASE FOR PERCENTAGES (104) (25) (20) (20) (20) (10) (5) (4) = MULTIPLE RESPONSE INTERSTATE 35E STUDY - TABLE S-9 Q5A. IN YOUR OPINION, WOULD THIS ROUTE (CORRIDOR A/PLEASANT AVENUE) MAKE IT EASIER THAN IT IS NOW FOR PEOPLE TO GET TO DOWNTOWN ST. PAUL, OR NOT? PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL 6 INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAINMENT BLDG. MGMT, MEDICAL YES - EASIER 74% 64% 80% 90% 80% 60% 80% 251 NO - NOT EASIER 8 4 5 5 5 10 20 50 NOT AFFECT DOWNTOWN 17 32 15 5 10 30 25 DON'T KNOW/NO ANSWER 1 5 - Q5B. IF 135-E WERE BUILT ALONG THAT P.0•JTE (CORRIDOR A/PLEASANT AVENUE), DO YOU T•1IN✓. THAT MORE PEOPLE, FEWER PEOPLE, ... OR ABOUT THE SAME NUMBER OF PEOPLE AS NOW WOL,LD ACTUALLY COME T(j DOWNTOWN 5T. PAUL? MORE 61% 64% 70% 50% 70% 40% 100% FEWER 3 5 - 501 SAME/NOT AFFECT 33 36 30 35 25 60 50 DON'T KNOW/NO ANSWER 3 10 5 BASE FOR PERCENTAGES " (104) (25) (20) (20) (20) (10) (4) (4) A.1-12 INFtR;fATE 35E STUDY - TAt:LE 5-10 (PART 1) Q5C. IF IT WERE L•UILT ALONG THAT ROUTE (CORRIt f A/PLEASANT A/LNUE), HOW AAOUT ... WOULD THERE BE MURE, ... LESS, ... OR ABOUT TUE SAME A: NOW? OFFICE EMPLOYMENT MORE LESS SAME/NOT AFFECT DON'T KNOW/NO ANSWER PERCENTAGE DISTR1uUT10N TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL L INS. UTFICE: LEGAL TAINME;IT BLDG. M(MT. MEDICAL 43% 32% 55% 45% 45% 40% 80% 52 68 40 50 45 50 20 100% 5 5 5 10 10 - - RETAIL STOPES MORE 45 36 60 40 45 50 LESS 6 8 5 5 5 - SAME/NOT AFFECT 45 56 35 55 40 40 DON'T KNOW/NO ANSWER 4 - - 10 10 80 20 DOCTORS/DENTISTS MORE 33 :6 45 40 35 40 40 LESS 8 12 5 5 10 10 - SAME/NOT AFFECT 57 72 50 55 50 50 40 DON'T KNOW/NO ANSWER 2 - - 5 - 20 LAWYERS/ACCOUNTANTS MORE 38 28 50 40 35 40 LESS 4 4 5 5 5 - SAME/NOT AFFECT 56 68 45 55 55 60 DON'T KNOW/NO ANSWER 2 - - - 5 - (Q5C. CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE) Q5C. (CONTINUED) INTERSTATE 35E STUDY - TABLE 5-10 (PART 2) PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION 80 20 25 75 100 100 TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL 6 INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAINNENT BLDG. MGMT. MEDICAL RESTAURANTS/BARS/ ENTERTAINMENT MORE 53% 52% 55% 50% 65% 40% 80% LESS 3 - 5 10 SAME/NOT AFFECT 41 48 40 35 30 .60 DON'T KNOW/NO ANSWER 3 - - 5 5 - 20 SHOPPERS MORE 60 52 75 60 65 50 80 LESS 7 '8 5 10 10 - - SAME/NO AFFECT 32 40 20 30 25 50 - DON'T KNOW/NO ANSWER 1 - - - - - 20 HOUSING LIKE APARTMENTS MORE 37 24 50 45 35 LESS 8 12 5 10 5 SAME/NOT AFFECT 51 60 40 40 60 DON'T KNOW/NO ANSWER 4 4 5 5 - 100% 100 4G 40 - 25 60 40 75 20 - HOTELS AND MOTELS MORE 57 56 55 60 60 60 80 - LESS 2 - 5 - - - 25 SAME/NOT AFFECT 36 40 40 35 30 40 - 75 DON'T KNJW/NO ANSWER 5 • - 5 10 - 20 - BASE FOR PERCENTAGES (104) (25) (20) (20) (70) (10) (5) (.) A.1-13 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1NTERSTATC 35E STUDY - TABLE S-11 Q6. LF 155-E WtRE COMPLETED ALONG THAT ROUTE (CURRIUOR A/PLEASANT AVCNUE), HOW WOULD IT AFFECT 1UU: OWN BUSINESS SITUATION? IMPROVE LT/GOT TO HELP BRING IN MORE PEOPLE/ BUSINESS SINGLE RESPONSES NOT AFFECT OWN BUSINESS SITUATION NOT AFFECT DOWNTOWN ST. PAUL PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL' & INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAINMENT BLDG. MGMT. MED1C.L 251 401 20% 15% 20% 401 20% 9 12 15 — S 4 10 10 60 44 12 50 70 60 30 20 75% 17 32 15 5 10 30 - 25 BASE FOR PERCENTAGES (104) (25) (20) (20) (20) (10) (5) (4) INTERSTATE 35E STUDY - TABLE S-I2 Q6A-C. WOULD YOU EXPECT TO HAVE MORE EMPLOYEES ... LARGER QUARTERS ... MORE SALES OR GROSS INCOME ... PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL 6 INS. OFFICES LEGAL TA1NMENT BLDG. MGMT. MEDICAL WOULD AFFECT OWN BUSINESS SITUATION 391 561 35% 251 301 40% 80% EMPLOYEES MORE 14 16 30 - 5 30 - FEWER 3 - - 10 5 SAME 21 40 5 15 15 10 80 DON'T KNOW/NO ANSWER 1 - - - 5 - QUARTERS LARGER 12 8 25 - 15 20 - SMALLER 2 - - 5 5 - SAME 24 48 10 15 10 20 80 DON'T KNOW I - - 5 - - SALES OR GROSS LCCOME MORE 28 52 30 5 15 30 60 LESS 1 - - - 5 - - SAME 8 4 5 10 10 10 20 DON'T KNOW/NU ANSWER 2 - - 10 - - NOT AFFECT UWN BUSINESS SITUATLOri 44 12 50 70 60 30 20 NOT AFFECT DOWNTOWN ST. PAUL BASE FOR PERCENTP L'a 17 32 15 5 10 30 - (104) (25) (20) (20) (20) (10) (5) A.1-14 75. 25 O. IN•EP:TATE 3SE STUDY - TABLE 5-13 QGD-E. IF I35-E WERE ACTUALLY COMPLETED ALONG THAT ROUTE (CORRIDOR A/PLEASANT AVENUE), WOULD YOU EXPECT TO HAVE ANY NEW Ltl`-'ESTMENTS OR. EXPE'IOITUPCS IN YOUR B':SINE.S SITUATION? ABOUT HOW MAhf DOLLARS IN IN/ESTMENTS WU'JLU YOU E/PECT TO MAYE? YES - 53,005,000 YES - DON'T KNOW AMOUNT OF ExPEN 1TUP.E NO - WOULD '.OT MAKE ANY E/.PE'.DITURES NOT AFFECT OWN BUSINESS SITUATL0'+ NOT AFFECT DOWNTOWN ST. PAUL PERCENTAGE DISTRIUUTION TOTAL FINA!.CE DUCII.FS. ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL & I',S. OFFICES LEGAL TAINMErJT BLDG. MG''T. MEOICA_ 19 5t 8 16% 10% 10% 20% 30 40 30 25% 20 30 60 44 12 50 70 60 30 20 75% 17 32 15 5 10 _10 25 100t 100t 100t 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% BASE FOR PERCENTAGES (104) (25) (20) (20) (20) (10) (5) (4) INTERSTATE 35E STUDY - TABLE 5-14 Q7. IN YOUR OPINION, IF I35-E WERE ACTUALLY COMPLETED ALONG THAT ROUTE (CORRIDOR B/LAFAYETTE FREEWAY), HOW WOULD LT AFFECT DOWNTOWN ST. PAUL7 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL & INS. OF=ICES LEGA.. TAINMENT BLDG. .GMT. MEDICAL GENERALLY FAVORABLE RESPONSES 38% 48% 45t 40% 35% 30% 20% GENERALLY NEUTRAL RESPONSES 4 5 5 5 20 GENERALLY UNFAVORABLE RESPONSES 21 4 20 35 25 10 60 25% NOT AFFECT DOWNTOWN 48 30 20 35 60 75 100t 100% 100% loot 100t 100► 100t 100t BASE FOR PERCENTAGES (104) (25) (20) (:U) (20) (1U) 5) (-) :L IALLL.T KL:.FJNSL:, PI:LSENTE0 Oh IULLOWIN.. TABLE A.1-15 INTERSTATE 35E STUDY - TABLE 5-15 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 t Q7. IN YOUR OPINION, IF 13S-E WERE ACTUALLY COMPLETED ALONG THAT ROUTE (CORRIDOR U/LAFAYETTE FREEWAY), HOW WOULD IT AFFECT DOWNTOWN 5T. PAUL? PERCENTAGE D!STRI3UTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL & INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAINMENT BLDG. MGMT. MEDICAL BETTER TRAFFIC FLOW/MORE ACCESSIBLE AND EASIER FOR PEOPLE TO GET IN AND OUT 14% 12% 25% 25% 5% 20% FASTER ROUTE FROM SOUTH; DENSER POPULATION SO MORE PEOPLE WOULD USE LT 13 8 10 20 15 20% WOULD KELP/BE BENEFICIAL/BETTER 11 20 15 15 MAKE IT EASIER TO 3Y- PASS ST. PAUL/TAKE TRAFFIC AWAY FROM DOWNTOWN 11 5 25 15 20 25% BY-PASSES DOWNTOWN AREA 8 - 5 1S 10 40 BRING MORE BUSINESS DOWNTOWN 5 8 10 10 - WOULD LOSE BUSINESS FROM SOUTHERN AREA 3 4 5 5 SINGLE NEGATIVE RESPONSES 2 - 5 - 10 - DON'T KNOW 2 - - 5 - 20 NOT AFFECT DOWNTOWN 37 48 30 20 35 60 75 106%x 100♦ 110%^ 105%x 105%x 100% 100% 100% BASE FOR PERCENTAGES (104) (25) (20) (20) (20) (10) (5) (4) x MULTIPLE RESPONSE INTERSTATE 35E STUDY - TABLE 5-15 Q7A. IN TOUR OPINION, WOULD IT (CORRIDOR B/LAFAYETTE FREEWAY) MAKE IT EASIER THAN IT IS NOW FOR PEOPLE TO GET DOWNTOWN ST. PAUL, OR NOT? YES - EASIER NO - NOT EASIER NOT AFFECT DON'T KNOW/NO ANSWER PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL 6 INS. OFFICES _E,AL TA!N ENT BLDG. MGMT 41% 48% 55% 35% 30% 40% 60% 16 4 15 20 30 40 251. 37 48 30 20 35 60 - 75 6 - 25 5 MEDICAL Q7B. IF I35-E WERE 0.!LT ALONG THAT ROUTE (CORRIDOR B/L1FA',E7TE FREEWAY), r.0 Y','; !'JK THAT '?ORE PEOPLE, ... FEWER PEOPLE, OR 6b0UT TdE SAME NUMLER 'JF PEOPLE AS NCd W4UL, ACTUALLY COML TO DOW!JTOwN ST, PAUL? MORE 35% 44% 30% 35'1 35% 40% 201 FEWER 13 4 10 25 20 2U 251. SAME/NOT AFFECT 51 52 60 35 45 G0 GO 75 DON'T KNOW/NO ANLWEP 1 - 5 BASF FOP PERCENTAGES (I04) (25) (201 (20) A.1-16 (70) (10) INTLI .IA1E 3SE STUDY - TAW ,-17 (PART 1) (17C. IF IT WERE BUILT ALON4 TIJAT ROUTE (CORRIDOR If/LAFAYETTE FREEWAY), HOW ABOUT ... WOULD THERE BE MORE, .. EL.:, . OR ABOUT TiIE SAME AS JJ',W? TOTAL ;AMPLE PEPCE'JTA,,F DISTRIBUTION FINANCE BUSINESS EMIR- PROPERTY/ RETAIL . IN: CT'_ICE. LEGAL TA!'a'ENT BLDG MG"T. M I�ICAL OFFICE EMPLO'MENT MORE 23% 32% 20% 10% 25% 40% 20% LESS 7 4 5 10 10 - 20 SAME/NOT AFFECT 70 64 75 80 65 60 60 RETAIL STORES MORE 26 32 30 15 30 40 LESS 12 4 20 20 10 - 20 25 SAME/NOT AFFECT 61 64 50 60 60 60 80 75 DON'T KN(,d/NO ANSWER 1 - - 5 - - - - DOCTORS/DENT,STc MORE 16 16 15 5 20 40 20 LESS 10 8 15 10 10 - 20 - SAME/NOT AFFECT 73 76 70 85 65 60 60 100 DON'T KNCd/NO ANSWER 1 - - - 5 - - - LAWYERS/ACCOUVTANTS MORE 19 24 20 5 20 40 20 LESS 7 4 15 5 5 - 20 - SAME/NOT AFFECT 73 72 65 90 70 60 60 100 DON'T KNOB/NO ANSWER 1 - - - 5 - (17C• CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE) Q7C. (CONTINUED) INTERSTATE 35E STUDY - TABLE S-17 (PART 2) 100% PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL d INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAINMENT BLDG. MGMT. MEDICAL RESTAURANTS/BARS/ ENTERTAINMENT MORE 291 401 251 151 351 401 201 - LESS 7 4 15 10 5 SAME/NOT AFFECT 63 56 60 75 55 60 80 1001 DON'T KNO/NO ANSWER 1 - - - 5 - - - SHOPPERS MORE 34 44 35 25 35 40 20 LESS 10 '4 15 15 15 - - - SAME/NOT AFFECT 56 52 50 60 50 60 80 100 HOUSING LIKE APARTMENTS MORE 23 28 20 20 25 30 20 LESS 8 8 10 10 5 - 20 SAME/NOT AFFECT 65 60 65 70 60 70 60 DON'T KNOW/No ANSWER 4 4 5 - 10 - - 100 HOTELS AND MOTELS MORE 31 40 25 25 35 40 20 LESS 8 4 10 10 15 - - - SAME/NOT AFFECT 58 48 65 65 45 60 80 100 DON'T KNOW/NO ANSWER 3 8 - - 5 - - - BASE FOR PERCENTAGES (104) (25) I:0) (20) (20) (10) (5) (4) 1 1 1 i A.1-17 INTERSTATE 35E STUDY - TABLE 5-18 Q8, IF 135-E WERE COMPLETED ALONG THAT ROUTE (CORRIDOR B/LAFAYETTE FREEWAY), HOW wOULD IT AFFECT YOUR OWN BUS1NLSS SITUATION.' PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL 6 INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAINMENT BLDG. MGMT. MEDICAL IMPROVE IT/GOT TO HELP 12t 28% 5% 5t 20% 40% BRING IN MORE PEOPLE/ BUSINESS 7 16 5t 5 10 SINGLE NEGATIVE RESPONSES 6 15 15 - SINGLE NEUTRAL RESPONSES 2 - 5 - - 20 NOT AFFECT OWN BUSINESS SITUATION 36 8 50 50 60 10 40 25% NOT AFFECT DOWNTOWN ST. PAUL 37 48 30 20 35 60 75 BASE FOR PERCENTAGES (104) (25) (20) (20' (20) (10) (5) C4) INTERSTATE 35E STUDY - TABLE 5-19 Q8A-C. WOULD YOU EXPECT TO HAVE MORE EMPLOYEES . LARGER QUARTERS ... MORE SALES OR GROSS INCOME ... PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL SAMPLE RETAIL FINANCE 5 INS BUSINESS OFFICES LEGAL ENTER- PROPERTY/ TAI MENT BLDG. MGM', ME)IC2:L WOULD AFFECT OWN BUSINESS SITUATION 27% 44% 20% 30% 5% 30% 60% EMP'.OYEES MORE 9 16 10 - 5 20 FEWER 1 - 5 - - - SA!!E 16 28 - 30 - 10 DON'T KNOW/NO ANSWER 1 - 5 - - - 60 QUARTERS LARGER 5 - 10 5 - 20 - SMALLER - - - - - - - SAME 22 4h 10 25 5 10 60 SALES OR GROSS IN:OME MORE 17 44 15 10 20 - LESS 3 - - 5 - - 40 SAME 6 - 15 5 10 20 DON'T KNOW/NO ANSWER 1 5 - - - NOT AFFECT OWN O'1SINESS SITUATION 36 8 SO 50 60 10 40 25't NOT AFFECT DOWNTOWN ST. PAUL 37 48 30 20 35 60 - 75 BASE FUR PLRCENTA,L'. (104) (25) C20) (20) (20) (10) (5) (4) A.1-18 1IJ'ERSTATC 35E STUDY - TABLE 5-70 Q8U-E. IF 135-E WERE ACTUALLY COMPLETED FL0r:; THAT ROUTE (CORRIDOR B/LAFAYETTE FREEWAY), WOULD YOU EXPECT TO MAKE ANY NEd 1N1E5TMENTS OF EXPENDITURES 1N YOUR BUSINESS SITUATION? ABOUT HOW MANY DOLLARS IN INIESTMEN'S UR EXPENDITURES WOULD YOU EXPCCT TO MAKE? A YES - DON'T KNOW AMOUNT OF EXPENDITURE 40 - WOULD NOT MAKE ANY EXPENDITURES NOT AFFECT OWN BUSINESS SITUATION NOT AFFECT DOWNTOWN ST. PAUL BASE FOR PERCENTAGES PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL L INS. OFFICES LEGAL •TAINmENT BLDG. MGMT. MEDICAL 6► 16% 5% 10► 21 28 20► 25 5► 20 60► 36 8 50 50 60 10 40 25► 37 48 30 20 35 60 3 100► 100t 100t 100t 100t 100t 100► 100► (104) (25) (20) (20) (20) (10) (5) (4) INTERSTATE 35E STUDY - TABLE S-21 Q9. IN YOUR OPINION, IF 135-E WERE ACTUALLY COMPLETED ALONG THAT ROUTE (CORRIDOR C/SHEPARD ROAD), HOW WOULD LT AFFECT DOWNTOWN ST. PAUL? PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL C INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAINMENT BLDG. MGMT, MEDICAL GENERALLY FAVORABLE RESPONSES 32% 16% 40% 30% 35% 50% 40► 25% GENERALLY NEUTRAL RESPONSES 7 .8 15 10 20 GENERALLY UNFAVORABLE RESPONSES 24 12 25 35 25 30 40 NOT AFFECT DOWNTOWN 37 64 35 20 40 10 75 100% 100► 100% 100► 100► 100% 100► 100► BASE FOR PERCENTAGES (104) (25) (20) (20) (20) (10) (5) (4) DETAILED RE5FUNSES PKLSENTED ON FOLLOWING TABLE. A.1-19 INTERSTATE SSE STUDY - TABLE S-22" 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 Q9. IN YOUR OPINION, IF 135-E MERE ACTUALLY COMPLETED ALONG THAT ROUTE (CORRIDOR C/SHEPARD ROAD), HOW WOULD IT AFFECT DOWNTOWN ST. PAUL? PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL C INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAINMENT BLDG. MGMT. MEDICAL WOULD HELP/AN IMPROVEMENT 101 121 101 104 151 BRING PEOPLE DOWNTOWN/ MORE PEOPLE INTO CITY 8 5 10 5 201 401 ACCESS TO AIRPORT/494/SOUTH 8 15 - 10 20 20 BY-PASSES DOWNTOWN AREA 8 5 15 10 10 20 SHEPARD ROAD IS HARD TO TRAVEL/NO WAY TO TIE-IN WITH FREEWAY 7 B 5 5 5 10 251 HELP TRAFFIC FLOW/ EASIER ACCESS TO DOWNTOWN 7 4 10 15. 10 TRAFFIC THERE I5 BAD NOW - WOULD BE WORSE 6 8 1S 5 IMPRACTICAL BETWEEN CLIFF AND RIVER 3 5 5 5 - RULN BEAUTY OF WATER FRONT. 2 - 5 20 DIFFICULT TO BUILD THERE 2 10 - WOULD DEPEND ON THE EXITS 2 5 10 SINGLE POSITIVE RESPONSES 2 5 5 - - SINGLE NEGATIVE RESPONSES 2 - 5 - 20 DON'T KNOW 3 8 - 10 - NOT AFFECT DOWNTOWN 37 64 • 20 40 10 75 10714 10414 105%4 110%4 1001 1001 12014 1001 BASE FOR PERCENTAGES (104) (25) (20) (20) (20) (10) (5) (4) i MULTIPLE RESPONSE INTERSTATE 35E STUDY - TABLE 5-23 Q9A. IN YOUR OPINION, WOULD IT (CORRIDOR C/SHEPARD ROAD) MAKE IT EASIER THAN IT IS NOW FOR PEOPLE TO GET DOWNTOWN ST. PAUL, OR NOT? PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL & INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAII.MENT BLEG. MGMT. MEDICAL YES - EASIER 441 201 451 45% 45% 701 1001 251 NO - NOT EASIER 17 16 20 25 15 20 - NOT AFFECT 37 64 35 20 40 10 75 DON'T KNOW/NO ANSWER 2 - 10 Q95. IF 135-E WERE BUILT ALONG THAT ROUTE CCORP.IDUR C/SHEPARD ROAD), DO YOU THI'iK THAT MOPE PEOPLE, FEWER PEOPLE, ... OR ABOUT THE SAME NUMBER OF PEOPLE AS NOW dOULO ACTUALLY COME TO DOWNTOWN ST. PAUL? MORE 34 20 45 30 20 50 100 25 FEWER 10 4 5 15 25 SAME/NOT AFFECT 55 76 50 50 55 50 75 DON'T KNOW/NO ANSWER I 5 BASE FOR PERCENTAGES (104) (25) (20) (20) (20) (10) (5) /'•T A. 1-20 1NTEP:TATE T5f STUt,Y - rARLf 5-24 (FAPT 1) QYC. IF IT WERE BUILT ALONG THAT ROUTE (CGPRIDOR C/SIgEPAPD ROAD), HOW ABOUT ... WOULD THERE BE MOPE, ... LESS, ... OR ABOUT 1HE SAME AS NUW? PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL C INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAINMENT BLDG. t4GMT. MEDICAL OFFICE EMPLOYMENT MOkL 20% 8► 408 10% 15t 40► 40t LESS 2 4 - 5 -- SAME/NOT AFFECT ,77 88 60 85 80 60 60 DON'T KNOW/NO ANSWER 1 • - 5 - - RETAIL STORES MORE 26 16 35 15 20 50 80 LESS 3 4 5 - 5 - - SAME/t10T AFFECT 70 80 60 80 75 50 20 DON'T KNOW/NO ANSWER 1 - - 5 - DOCTORS/DENTISTS MORE 17 30 10 15 40 60 LESS 6 8 5 5 5 10 - SAME/NOT AFFECT 76 92 65 80 80 50 40 DON'T KNOW/NO ANSWER 1 - - 5 - - - LAWYERS/ACCOUNTANTS MORE 21 8 30 10 15 50 80 LESS 3 4 S 5 - - SAME/NOT AFFECT 75 88 65 80 85 50 20 DON'T KNOW/NO ANSWER 1 - - 5 - - - (Q9C. CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE) Q9C. (CONTINUED) INTERSTATE 35E STUDY - TABLE 5-24 (PART 2) 100% 100 100 100 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL 6 INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAINMENT BLDG. MGMT, MEDICAL RESTAURANTS/BARS/ ENTERTAINMENT MORE 31t 24% 35% 25% 30% 40t 80% LESS 5 4 5 - 10 10 - SAME/NOT AFFECT 62 72 60 70 55 50 20 DON'T KNOW/NO ANSWER 2 - - 5 5 - 100% SHOPPERS MORE 34 24 40 30 25 50 80 25 LESS 5 4 5 - 15 - - - SAME/NOT AFFECT 60 72 55 65 60 50 20 75 DON'T KNOW;NO ANSWER 1 - - 5 - - MOUSING LIKE APARTMENTS MORE 25 16 35 15 25 40 60 LESS 4 4 5 5 5 - SAME/NOT AFFECT 68 76 55 75 70 60 40 DON'T KNOW/NO ANSWER 3 4 5 5 - - - HOTELS AND MOTELS MORE 31 20 40 25 25 50 80 LESS 4 4 5 - 10 - - SAME/NOT AFFECT 64 76 55 70 65 50 20 DON'T ANOW;NO ANSWER 1 - - 5 - 100 100 BASE FOR PEI;CrNTAGES (104) (25) (20) (20) (:0) (10) (S) (4) A.1-21 INTERSTATE T5C STUDY - TABLE S-24 Q10. IF 135-E MERE CCMPLETEO ALONG THAT ROUTE (CORRIDOR C;SHEPARO ROAD), HOW WOULD IT AFFECT YOUR OWN BUSINESS SITUATION? PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL C INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAINNENT BLDG. MGMT. MEDICAL IMPROVE IT/GOT TO HELP 15% 16% 15% - 15% 40% 40% BRING IN MORE PEOPLE/ BUSINESS 5 8 15 - SINGLE NEGATIVE RESPONSES 3 10% 20 SINGLE NEUTRAL RESPONSES 2 10 NOT AFFECT OWN BUSINESS SITUATION 38 12 35 60 45 50 40 25% NOT AFFECT DOWNTOWN ST. PAUL 37 64 35 20 40 10 75 BASE FOR PERCENTAGES (104) (25) (20) (20) (20) (10) (5) (4) INTERSTATE 35E STUDY - TABLE 5-26 Q10A-C. WOULD YOU EXPECT TO HAVE MORE EMPLOYEES ... LARGER QUARTERS MORE SALES OR GROSS INCOME ... PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL E INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAiNMENT BLDG. MGMT. MEDICAL WOULD AFFECT OWN BUSINESS SITUATION 25% 24% 30% 20% 15% 40% 60% EMPLOYEES MORE 13 12 30 - 5 40 - FEWER 2 - - 5 - - 20 SAME 10 12 15 10 40 QUARTERS LARGER 9 4 25 - 5 20 - SMALLER - - _ _ - - - SAME 15 20 5 15 10 20 60 DON'T KNGW/NO A!:SWER I - - 5 - SALES OR ;BOSS INCOME MORE 19 24 30 5 15 30 LESS 1 SAME 4 - 10 10 DON'T KNOW/NO A!ISWER 1 5 - "0 20 NOT AFFECT OWN BUSINESS SITUATION 38 12 35 60 45 50 40 25 NOT AFFECT UU'.JNTGWN ST. PAUL 37 64 35 20 40 10 75 BASE FUR PERCENTAGES (104) (25) (2U) (20) (20) (10) (5 ) t A.1-22 INTERSTATE 35E STUDY — TABLE 5-27 QIOD—E. IF 135—E WERE ACTUALLY COMPLETED ALONG THAT ROUTE (CORRIDOR C/SHEPARD ROAD), WOULD YOU EXPECT TO MAKE AN( NEW INVESTMENTS Ok EXPENDITURES IN tOUk BUSINESS SITUATION? ABOUT HOW MUCH WOULD YOU EXPECT TO MAKE? YES — 53,000,000 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER— PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL is INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAINMENT BLDG. MGMT. MEDICAL 1► 5► YES — DON'T KNOW AMOUNT OF EXPENDITURE 6 8► 5 10► 5♦ 40► NO — WOULD NOT MAKE ANY EXPENDITURE 18 16 20 10 10 40► 20 NOT AFFECT OWN BUSINESS SITUATION 38 12 35 60 45 50 40 25► NOT AFFECT DOWNTOWN ST. PAUL _27_ 64 _ 20 40 10 75 100► 100► 100► 100► 100► 100► 100► 100► BASE FOR PERCENTAGES (104) (25)- (20) (20) (20) (10) (5) (4) INTERSTATE 35E STUDY — TABLE 5-28 Q11. NOW THAT YOU HAVE SEEN THREE DIFFERENT ROUTES THAT HAVE BEEN PROPOSED FOR INTERSTATE 35—E, WHICH ONE, IN YOUR OPINION, WOULD BE BEST FOR DOWNTOWN ST. PAULT PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER— PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL 1 INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAINMENT BLDG. MGMT. MEDICAL CORRIDOR A/ PLEASANT AVENUE 53► 48► 60► 65► 60♦ 30► 60► CORRIDOR B/ LAFAYETTE FREEWAY 20 28 20 25 15 20 CORRIDOR C/ SHEPARD ROAD 19 16 15 10 15 30 40 75% NO DIFFERENCE 5 8 5 S 10 DON'T KNOW _ L __1._ 10 . 25 100► 100► 100► 100► 100► 100► 100► 100► BASE FOR PERCENTAGES (l04) (25) (20) (20) (20) (10) (5) (4) RESPONSES TO "WHY DO YOU SAY THAT" ARE PRESENTED ON THE FOLLOWING TABLE. A. 1- 23 INTERSTATE 35E STUDY - TABLE 5-29 (PART 1) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Q11. WHY DO YOU SAY THAT? PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL t INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAINMENT BLDG. MGMT. MEDICAL CORRIDOR A/ PLEASANT AVENUE 48♦ 60% 65% 60% 30% 60% AN EXPENDITURE C COMMITMENT HAVE ALREADY BEEN MADE THERE 15 16 10 25 20 10 DOWNTOWN ST. PAUL MORE ACCESSIBLE TO GREATER NUMBER OF PEOPLE 15 12 35 25 20 SHORTEST ROUTE/MOST DIRECT ROUTE 11 8 15 20 10 RIGHT OF WAY HAS ALREADY BEEN ACQUIRED 6 8 5 10 20 WILL BRING IN TRAFFIC FROM THE SOUTH 6 12 5 5 - 20 GOES INTO THE HEART OF DOWNTOWN 6 8 - 5 5 20 FITS INTO THE PLANNING 4 - 5 15 - DIRECT ACCESS FOR PEOPLE IN HIGH INCOME AREAS 2 5 5 - SINGLE RESPONSES 3 10 - 5 BASE FOR PERCENTAGES (104) (25) (20) (20). (20) (10) (5) (4) NOTE: MULTIPLE RESPONSE DETAILED RESPONSES FOR "CORRIDOR B/LAFAYETTE FREEWAY" AND "CORRIDOR C/SHEPARD ROAD" ON FOLLOWING TABLE. INTERSTATE 35E STUDY - TABLE S-29 (PART 2) Q11. (CONTINUED) PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL 6 INS OFFICES LEGAL TAINMENT BLDG MGMT. MEDICAL CORRIDOR 8/ LAFAYETTE FREEWAY 20% 28% 20% 25% 15% 20% RUNS WHERE THERE IS NO DIRECT ROUTE DOWNTOWN 10 16 5 5 15 10 - COMES THROUGH A POPULATED AREA 4 8 5 5 - GOES RIGHT INTO HEART OF OUWNTOWN 3 4 5 5 - GOES TO WEST ST. PAUL/ CLOSER TO SOUTH • ST. PAUL 3 - 10 - 10 SINGLE RESPONSES 4 8 - 10 - - CORRIDOR C/5i(EPARD ROAD 19 16 15 10 15 30 40% 75% MOST DIPECT 7 4 10 5 - 40 25 LOTS OF TRAFFIC THERE NEEDS EA:IER ACCESS 3 5 5 10 CITY WOULDN'T BE OISRUPTEU 3 - 5 - 5 - 25 A GREATER ("PAWING AREA 2 4 - 5 - - - SINGLE kLSPUN,LS 6 8 5 20 25 BASF FOR PERCENTAGES (104) NOTE: MULTIPLE: RE',PQN;E (25) (20) (20) (20) (10) (5) (4) A.1-24 INTIRSTAtE '.SL .:;TU[)Y — TABLE S-31I Q12. WHAT PROBLEMS MIGHT THERE BC WITH THIS P/DTICULAR ROUTE (CORRIDOR A/PLEASANT AVENUE) FOR INTERSTATE 35—L? NONE/NO PROBLEMS PERCENTA(.E DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS E1TER— PROPERTY/ SAMPLE DETAIL 1'15 OFFICE: LEGAL TLItIMENT L'LO,. MGMT, MEDICAL 25% 32% 20% 5% 25% 70% 20% DISRUPTION OF RESIDENTIAL AREA/DISPLACEMENT OF PEOPLE/TAKING OUT HOMES 25 8 25 30 50 20 25% NOISE 23 16 25 30 45 — — — AIR POLLUTION 12 4 15 10 30 — — PEOPLE DON'T WANT IT THERE 12 12 15 15 5 40 TRAFFIC CONGESTION/DUMP ALOT OF TRAFFIC INTO ALREADY CONGESTED AREAS 11 10 30 5 20 25 TOO CLOSE TO HOSPITALS 6 — 10 5 10 — 25 EXIT C ENTRY WAY I5 TOO COMPLEX 4 8 10 DETERIORATION OF PROPERTY VALUES 4 — - 15 5 SINGLE RESPONSES 6 4 5 15 5 DON'T KNOW 16 28 0 10 10 10 20 25 144%x 112%x 140%x 165%x 200%x 100% 100% 100% BASE FOR PERCENTAGES (104) (25) (20) (20) (20) (10) (5) (4) x MULTIPLE RESPONSE INTERSTATE 35E STUDY — TABLE 5-31 Q13. FROM WHAT YOU KNOW OR HAVE HEARD, 15 THERE ANY PUBLIC CONCERN OR CONTROVERSY ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR ROUTE (CORRIDOR A/PLEASANT AVENUE)? PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER— PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL is INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAINMENT BLDG. MGMT, MEDICAL TES — HAVE HEARD CONTROVERSY Ill 68% 100% B0% 95% 70% 801 25% NOISE PROBLEM 38 40 50 40 45 30 GROUP OF PEOPLE/ RESIDENTS IN AREA COMPLAINED 35 28 30 40 45 10 80 25 DISRUPTION OF RESI— DENTIAL AREA/DISPLACE— MENT OF PEOPLE/REMOVAL OF HOMES 25 16 35 25 35 30 POLLUTION/ADD TO POLLUTION 14 4 5 20 25 40 UNNECESSARY DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY AND BUILDINGS 7 12 10 5 5 ADVERSE PROPERTY VALUES/ PROPERTY DEVALUATION 6 5 10 10 25 ADD TO TRAFFIC CONGESTION 3 10 5 — CONCERNED FOR HOSPITALS 2 5 5 — SINGLE RESPONSES 4 IS — 10 DON'T REMEMBER 3 4 5 5 — NO — HAVE NOT HEARD CONTROVERSY �.i— 20 50 °0 75 BASE FOR PERCENTAGES (104) (25) (20) (20) (20) (10) (5) (4) NU1E: F1ULIIPLE RC.PUNSE A.1-25 INTERSTATE 4SE STUDY - 1Ad:L S-1: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Q14. HOW ABOUT THIS ROUTE (CORRIDOR B/LAFAYETTE FREEWAY). WHAT PROBLEMS MIGHT THERE uf WITH THIS PARTICULAR ROUTE? NONE/NO PROBLEMS PERCENTAGE DISTRI,UTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL C INS OFFICES LEGAL TAINMENT 8LDG. MGMT, MEDICAL 251 40% 351 51 50% 208 501 DISRUPTION OF RESIDENTIAL AREA/DISPLACEMENT OF PEOPLE/TAKING OJT HOMES 20 12 25% 30 25 10 20 - EXPENSIVE/PURCHASING REAL ESTATE 15 ♦ 25 . 20 25 20 BY-PASSES DOWNTOWN/TAKES SHOPPERS AWAY FROM DOWNTOWN 12 8 5 20 20 10 20 NOISE 11 4 10 15 25 - - BY-PASSES AREA THAT SHOULD BE SERVICED 10 4 20 15 10 20 TOO CONGESTED/BRINGS MORE TRAFFIC INTO ALREADY CONGESTED AREAS 6 10 10 5 10 WOULD NOT BRING PEOPLE INTO DOWNTOWN 5 12 5 5 AIR POLLUTION 3 - - 15 GOES THROUGH SOME RESIDENTIAL AREAS 2 - 5 5 - - SINGLE RESPONSES 5 8 - - 10 25 DON'T KNOW _Li_ 12 20 _j 20 20 25 1261x 1041x 120%4 140%x 155%x 11014 1201x 100% BASE FOR PERCENTAGES (104) (25) (20) (20) (20) (10) (5) (4) x MULTIPLE RESPONSE INTERSTATE 35E STUDY - TABLE S-33 Q1S. FROM WHAT YOU KNOW OR HAVE HEARD, 15 THERE ANY PUBLIC CONCERN OR CONTROVERSY ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR ROUTE (CORRIDOR B/LAFAYETTE FREEWAY)? PERCENTAGE OISTRIBUTIGN TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL 6 INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAINMENT BLDG. mGMi. MEDICAL TES - HAVE HEARD CONTROVERSY 22% 12% 35% 151 45% 201 NOISE PROBLEM 6 8 10 5 5 PEOPLE DON'T WANT 1T THERE 6 5 - 25 _ WASTE OF MONEY TO CHANGE PLANS 5 4 5 - 15 - HOMES REMOVED 4 - 15 - - 20 BY-PASSES AREA THAT SHOULD BE SERVICED 2 5 5 SINGLE RESPONSES 2 5 5 DON'T REMEMBER 2 - 5 5 NO - HAVE NOT HEARD CONTROVERSY 78 88 65 85 8 100% 80 10;1 BASE FOR PERCENTAGLS NOTE: MULTIPLE RESPONSE (104) (25) (20) (20) (20) (10) (5) (4) 1 A.1-26 j?TEFSTATE 35F STUDY - TABLE S-34 Q16. AND THIS ROUTE (CORPIDOR C/SHEPAkJ kOAD). WHAT PROBLEMS MIGHT THERE BE WITH THIS PARTICULAR ROUTE' PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS EATER- PkOPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL 6 INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAINMINT BLDG. MOMT. MEDICAL NONE/NO PROBLEMS 21% 36% 25% 50% 20% 50% EXPENSIVE/COST OF CONSTRUCTION 18 12 25% 15 35% 10 HARD TO CONSTRUCT/DIFFI- CULT TO BUILD THERE 14 8 10 15 30 40 SHEPARD ROAD T00 ACTIVE NOW/ADD TO TRAFFIC ON ALREADY CONGESTED ROAD 12 12 25 15 5 BY-PASSES DOWNTOWN/LOOP AREA/SKIRTS CITY 12 16 20 5 20 20 INHIBIT FUTURE BEAUTLFL- CATION OF WATER FRONT 11 8 5 20 15 20 LIMITED ACCESS/NOT MUCH ACCESS 10 20 5 5 5 20 25 FLOODING/DISRUPTION OF FLOOD PLANE 6 10 5 15 DOESN'T SERVE ANYONE/ DOESN'T SERVE LARGE ENOUGH AREA 5 10 5 10 — NOISE 3 - 5 5 - 20 INTERFERE WITH RAILROAD OPERATION/NSP/WEBS PUBLISHING 3 - 5 10 SINGLE RESPONSES 5 8 5 10 DON'T KNOW 12 0 20 _1_ 10 20 2 _ 132%x 128%x 110%X 145%x 155%x 100% 140tx 100% BASE FOR PERCENTAGES (104) (25) (20) (20) (20) (10) (5) C4) x MULTIPLE RESPONSE INTERSTATE 35E STUDY - TABLE S-35 Q17. FROM WHAT YOU KNOW OR HAVE HEARD, 15 THERE ANY PUBLIC CONCERN OR CONTROVERSY ABOUT THE PARTICULAR ROUTE (CORRIDOR C/SHEPARD ROAD)? PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL 6 INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAI".`:ENT BLDG. MGMT. ME^ICAL YES — HAVE HEARD CONTROVERSY 16% 12% 1S% 25% 15% 10% AO% MONEY DOWN THE DRAIN/ INCREASE IN ROAD CONSTRUCTION COST 9 8 10 10 10 20 DIFFICULT TO BUILD THERE 3 — — 5 10 — - ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS 3 — 10 — 10 TRAFFIC CONGESTION 2 10 — — - SINGLE RESPONSES 4 4 - 10 20 NO - HAVE NOT HEARD CONTROVERSY 84 J8 /1_ / _ gL 20 i;\SC FOR PLR:CNIAC.LS NOTL: MULTIPLE kl_•PONSE 1104) (25) (:J) L".'0) (:o) (10) is) 15) A.1-27 INTERSTATE 35E STUDY - TABLE 5-36 Q18. IN YOUR OPINION, WHICH ONE OF THESE WOULD 8E BEST FOR ST. PAUL AS A WHOLE? PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PRJPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL L INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAINMENT BLDG. ',GMT. MECIC=_ CORRIDOR A/ PLEASANT AVENUE 44% 44% 45% 40% 60% 20% 60% 25% CORRIDOR 8/ LAFAYETTE FREEWAY 24 32 15 40 20 20 CORRIDOR C/ SHEPARD ROAD 24 16 30 20 15 30 40 75 NO DIFFERENCE 2 5 10 - DON'T KNOW 6 8 5 5 20 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 103% BASE FOR PERCENTAGES (104) (25) (20) (20) (20) (10) (5) (4) RESPONSES TO "WHY DO YOU SAY THAT" ARE PRESENTED ON THE FOLLOWING TABLE. A.1-28 QI8. WHY UO YOU SAY THAT? INTERSTATE 35L :iuDf - t/,!LE S-37 (PART 1) PERCENTASF DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL & INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAINMENT BLDG M,MT. MEDICAL CORRIDOR A! PLEASANT AVENUE 44% 44' 4=1, 40% 60% 20% 60% 25% SERVES A LOT MORE PEOPLE 19 8 35 15 20 20 40 IT'S STARTED/ORIGINAL PLAN -BEST TO FOLLOW THR0UG4 14 20 5 10 25 20 25 MOST DIRECT/GOES DIRECTLY TO BUSINESS AREA 10 8 15 10 15 BRINGS PEOPLE INTO TrIE CITY 7 16 5 10 IT'S IN ST. PAUL- SERVES RESIDENTS 2 8 - - SINGLE RESPONSES 3 4 5 5 BASE FOR PERCENTAGES (104) (25) (20) (20) (20) (10) (5) (4) NOTE: MULTIPLE RESPONSE DETAILED RESPONSES FOR "CORRIDOR B/LAFAYETTE FREEWAY" AND "CORRIDOR C/SHEPARD ROAD" ON FOLLOWING PAGES. Q18. (CONTINUED) INTERSTATE 35E STUDY - TABLE 5-37 (PART 2) PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL & INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAINMENT BLDG. MGMT, MEDICAL CORRIDOR B/ LAFAYETTE FREEWAY 24% 32% 15% 40% 20% 20% SATISFIES AN EXISTING NEED/PEOPLE NEED A FREEWAY HERE 9 12 10 5 10 10 GOES DIRECTLY TO DOWNTOWN 5 12 5 5 BRIN;,S GREATER NUMBER OF PEOPLE INTO DOWNTOWN AREA 4 15 10 SERVES MORE PEOPLE 2 4 5 - OPENS UP A WHOLE NEW AREA 2 4 - 5 SINGLE RESPONSES 5 $ 10 5 LIASL FUR PLRCLNTA6LS NOTE: MULTIPLE RESPONSES (1TH.) (2S) (20) (20) (20) (10) ( 5 ) (+) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 A.1-29 Q18. (CONTINUED) CORRIDOR C/SHEPARD ROAD LEAST DISRUPTION OF RESIDENTIAL AREA/NO NEED OF DISPLACING INTERSTATE 35E STUDY - TABLE S-37 (PART 3) PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL 5 INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAINMENT BLDG. MGMT, MEDICAL 24% 16% 30% 20% 15% 30% 40% 7 11 PEOPLE 14 8 20 20 10 - 20 50 MOST DIRECT ACCESS TO DOWNTOWN 6 4 15 - 5 - 20 EASY TRAFFIC FLOW 5 - 5 5 S 10 20 GOOD HOOKUP TO 494 AND AIRPORT 4 4 - 5 10 MINLMUM OF NOISE 3 - 5 - 10 NOT TOO CLOSE TO HOSPITALS/SCHOOLS 2 4 5 - AIR POLLUTION LESS 2 - 5 5 FOLLOWS ROUTE THAT IS THERE NOW 2 4 5 - - SINGLE RESPONSES 4 - 20 20 25 BASE FOR PERCENTAGES (104) (25) (20) (20) (20) (10) (5) (4) NOTE: MULTIPLE RESPONSE A.1-30 1 NTEP;TATF 35E STUDY - TAUI.E 5-38 119. ASSUMING THAT IT WA. DECIDED NOT TO BUILD A'JY 35-E, WHAT DO YOU EXPECT ST. PAUL WU'+LD BE LIKE IN A FLW YEARS? PERCENTAGE DISTPIL•UT10N TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL & INS. 'OFFICE; LEGAL TAINMENT BLDG. I":MT. MEDICAL GENERALLY FAVOPABLE RESPONSE 7% 8% St 5% 15% SENERALLY NEUTRAL RESPONSE 42 48 25 35 45 50t 603. 75% GENERALLY UNFAVORABLE RESPONSE iI 44 70 60 40 50 40 25 100► 100% 100% 100♦ 100% 100% 100% 100% EASE FOR PERCENTAGES (104) (25) (20) (20) (20) (10) (5) (4) DETAILED RESPONSES PRESENTED ON FOLLOWING TABLE. INTERSTATE 35E STUDY - TABLE 5-39 Q19. ASSUM1NG THAT 1T WAS DECIDED NOT TO BUILD ANY 35-E, WHAT DO YOU EXPECT 5T. PAUL WOULD BE LIKE IN A FEW YEARS? PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL C INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAINMENT BLDG. MGMT. MEDICAL Ni CHANGE/NOT A WHOLE LOT OF DIFFERENCE 24% 20% 20% 15% 25% 20% 60% 75► ADVERSE FOR DOWNTOWN ST. PAUL/DOWNTOWN 22 16 35 10 25 30 20 25 WOULD NOT GROW/STAY AS 17 15 14 8 20 30 5 10 20 WOULD HINDER GROWTH/ STUNT GROWTH 8 8 10 10 10 ST. PAUL WOULD STILL GROW 8 16 5 - 15 - WOULD BECOME MORE CONGESTED 6 10 10 20 - HAVE TO BUILD SOMETHING/ UPGRADE ROADS 5 8 5 5 10 WCJLD HURT IF WE DON'T GET ACCESS TO SOUTH 4 8 - 5 I0 SMALL NUMBER OF SHOPPERS 4 - 10 5 10 DIFFICULT TO GET TO ST. PAUL 2 4 5 - SINGLE RESPONSES 4 8 5 5 - DON'T KNOW 4 4 _._ 0 10 105%x 100% IOS%x 105%x 100► 120%x 100% 100♦ BASE FOR PERCENTAGES (104) u MULTIPLE RESPONSE (25) (20) (20) (20) (10) (5) (4) A.1-31 INTERSTATE 35E STUDY - TABLE 5-+J "ART 1) Q19A. WELL, IF 35-E IS NOT BUILT, HOW ABOUT IN DOWNTOWN ST. PAUL, WILL THERE UE MORE, .. LESS, ... OR ABOUT THE SAMt As NOW? PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL 6 INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAINMENT BLDG. MGMT, MEDICAL OFFICE EMPLOYMENT MORE 11% 24% 15t - 10% - - - LESS 32 40 45 25% 20 40% 20% - SAME 54 32 40 75 65 50 80 100t DON'T KNOW/NO ANSWER 3 4 - - 5 10 - - RETAIL STORES MORE 11 24 10 5 5 - 20 - LESS 42 36 60 35 45 50 40 - SAME 43 36 30 60 , 45 40 40 75 DON'T KNOW/NO ANSWER 4 4 - - 5 10 - 25 DOCTORS/DENTISTS MORE 8 16 5 5 10 - - LESS • 47 48 60 45 45 50 40 - SAME 42 32 35 50 40 40 60 100 DON'T KNOW/NO ANSWER 3 4 - - 5 10 - - LAWYERS/ACCOUNTANTS MORE 10 20 10 5 5 - 20 LESS 34 28 60 30 15 50 40 - SAME 52 48 30 65 70 40 40 100 DON'T KNOW/NO ANSWER 4 4 - - 10 10 - - (Q19A. CONTINUED ON FOLLOWING PAGE) Q19A. (CONTINUED) INTERSTATE 35E STUDY - TABLE 5-40 (PART 2) PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL S INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAINMENT BLDG. MGMT. MEDICAL RESTAURANTS/BARS/ ENTERTAINMENT MORE 14% 32% 15% 5% 5% - 20% LESS 37 32 55 40 25 50% 40 SAME 46 32 30 55 65 40 40 DON'T KNOW/NO ANSWER 3 4 - - 5 10 - 100'1 SHOPPERS MORE 13 28 10 5 10 - 20 - LESS 47 44 80 45 30 50 40 - SAME 37 24 10 50 55 40 40 100 DON'T KNOW/NO ANSWER 3 4 - 5 10 - - HOUSING LIKE APARTMENTS MORE 16 24 20 20 5 - LESS 33 36 45 30 25 50 SAME 45 32 35 50 55 40 DON'T KNOW/NO ANSWER 6 8 - - 15 10 20 80 25 75 HOTELS/MOTELS MORE 22 44 25 10 5 - 40 25 LESS 32 20 55 25 35 50 20 - SAME 41 28 20 65 50 40 40 75 DON'T KNOW/NO ANSWER 5 8 - 10 10 - - BASL FOR PCRCCNTA(,LS (104) (25) (20) C20) (70) (10) (5) (4) A.1-32 INTERSTATE 35E STUDY - TABLE 5-41 Q20. HOW INTERESTED HAVE YOU BEEN IN KEEPING Ur- WIT0 INFORMATION AHD PUBLICITY AuOUT THE ST. PAUL AREA FREEWAY SYSTEM? WOULD YUU SAr YOU :•AVE BEEN VEkY INTERESTED, . . SOMEWHAT INTERESTED, . NOT TOO INTERESTED, . OR NOT AT ALL INTERESTED? PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL L INS. OFFICES LEGAL -TAI'1MENT BLDG. MGM'. VERY INTERESTED 33% 12% 50% 30% 45% 20% 40% SOMEWHAT INTERESTED 47 60 45 55 35 30 60 NOT TOO INTERESTED 14 16 5 15 15 30 NOT AT ALL INTERESTED 5 12 20 NO ANSWER _I_ _._ 100/ 1001 1001 1001 1001 100► 1001 BASE FOR PERCENTAGES (104) (25) (20) (20) (20) (10) (5) INTERSTATE 35E STUDY - TABLE 5-42 Q21. WHAT IS YOUR TITLE OR POSITION? PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL S INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAINMENT BLDG. MGM'. MANAGER 37% 68% 15% 50% 51 60% 401 OWNER/PARTNER 24 .8 - 5 90 40 VICE PRESIDENT 22 12 80 15 5 PRESIDENT/CHAIRMAN 8 8 S 15 40 SECRETARY/TREASURER 5 4 15 - 20 DOCTOR 4 1001 100% 100% 100♦ 100% 1001 100% MEDICAL 501 25 25 100% 1 (4) 1 1 1 1 MEDICAL 1 1 100% 100% 1 BASE FOR PERCENTA,;LS (104) (25) (20) (20) (20) (10) (5) (4) A. 1- 33 INTERSTATE 35E STUDY - TABLE 5-43 Q23. IN WHICH CITY, SUBURB, OR COMMUNITY? PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL FINANCE BUSINESS ENTER- PROPERTY/ SAMPLE RETAIL S INS. OFFICES LEGAL TAINMENT dLOG. MGMT. MEDICA. ST. PAUL CITY 48• 48% 35% 50% 45% 70% 40% 75% OTHER RAMSEY COUNTY 21 28 30 25 15 10 DAKOTA COUNTY 10 4 20 10 15 - 25 MINNEAPOLIS CITY 7 8 5 10 10 20 - OTHER HENNEPIN COUNTY 7 4 5 5 10 10 20 WASHINGTON COUNTY 5 8 5 5 20 OUTSIDE THE 7-COUNTY METRO AREA 2 —.2._ 5 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% BASE FOR PERCENTAGES (104) (25) (20) (20) (20) (10) (5) (4) A.1 34 APPENDIX 2 PRESENTATION ON INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 35E FROM WEST SEVENTH STREET TO THE CAPITOL APPROACH COMPLEX By WILLIAM C. MERRITT, CHIEF ENGINEER DISTRICT 9, MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS A. 2- 1 - A. 2-4 Note: The presentation was given at a meeting of public and private bodies sponsored by Operation 85 and held at the St. Paul Civic Center to obtain input on proposed I-35E on February 26, 1973. Operation 85 is an organization comprised of St. Paul civic leaders who are actively interested in the future of the City of St. Paul. A.2-1 PRESENTATION ON INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 35E WEST SEVENTH STREET TO CAPITOL APPROACH BY: WILLIAM C. MERRITT As pesented at Operation '85 Meeting Febtuany 26, 1973 Pietu/Le i6 you wilt, a nation o6 108 million people with ten million motor veh.icdee traveling 55 billion mites annually over 3.1 million mites o6 /Loads, streets and highways. The nation is obu.iousty the United et/rtes. The yeas KU 1921. Today, some 50 years Rater, we are a nation o6 205 mutton people, with 110 million moto& vehi tes that tog overt a tritli.on mites o6 travel each yeah, on 3.7 million mites o6 /Loads, streets and highways. The trend into the 6utuue indicates that by 1985, we wits as a nation be 6aeing the p'ospect o6 140 million vehictes, traveling 1 1/2 trillion miles annually. To bung these 6igunes closer to home we bind that between 1960 and 1970 passenger can negistnati.on in the seven county metnopolitan acea increased gum 575,000 to 851,000 Lvt an .increase o6 48 percent in ten years. This is mote than the pop'tation .increase 604 the same period. Further, by the yeaL 1990 the Twin Cities area is expected to .increase to a poRutationci 1.9 million. These trends are not a recent phenomenon. 16 we took at the St. Paul metropotitan aeea between 1920 and 1940 we bind that while the poluiation increased 29 pertcent gum 260,000 to 336,000, automobile Aegis-Mt/ions increased 491 percent. These 6.igu/Les represent a thumbna,i.t sketch o6 the basic li.6e styte o6 our nation and ou/L community, as we have group 6/Lom a /Lunar dominated, segregated society to the urban, mobil society o6 today. But perhaps even mime impoktantty they iltustnate the ptobtems laced by cong/Less, planners, and public administrators --how to provide this napidty-changing society with the senv.ices and amenities which are necessary sort the smooth operation o6 auk everyday community Rise. And, 06 course, one o6 the major openationat 6uncti,ons to be dealt with is transportation. These are not new concerns; they ace ptobtems that the nation has been /Leeogniz.ing sort oven 30 years. On a national tevel cong/Less ne4ponded early in the 1940's with passage o6 the De6ense Act o6 1941. This act authonized a 6ederal appropriation o6 ten million dotlans to be apportioned among the Crates and to be matched by them to provide a surd sort the raking o6 surveys and ptans bon 6utune highway eonstnuction. The De6ense DepAtment, through the then designated U. S. BLueau o6 PubLia Roads, /Lequested the Highway Depvk.Lnent to select a stnategie highway network which would connect majo/L economic and population centers in the State. To seteet the netwa/Lk, the DepvLtment studied available data consisting 06 trab6ic stow maps and motor vehicle trip in60&mation gatheaed 6&om motorists using nadiat routes to enter, teave, on pass thhLough the then de6ined Twin Cities metaapotitan area. Funthe', Gongnessionat concern vas expressed in the Federal Aid Highway Act o6 1944 which provided 6unds sort developing an Lnton'egionat system. This act made possible aid in modernizing majon unhan tnah6ie arteries. Again sreciat studies were made to determine locations o6 major east -west and north -south anteries within the Minneapolis and St. Paul area. These types 06 studies and programs continued through the 1940's and ea&ly 1950's given .impetus, not only by national legislation, but by state and Local teg.isltction as well. A special Highway Study Commission Lau established by the 1953 Minnesota Legistature. The culmination o6 ail these events and e66onts was embodied in the Federtat Aid Highway Act o6 1956. This act increased 6ederal 6und patti.cipaiion to 90 percent and provided that a 40,000 mite system o6 interstate highways be constructed. Events occurring since that time have caused the system to be expanded to 42,500 mites o6 which Minnesota has designated 914 mites 06 which 611 mites arts currently completed and open to tra66ic. In view o6 the area o6 own discussion today, it may be weft to point out that Section 116(b) 06 the act stiputated that local needs, to the extent pnartieabte, 6uitabte, and 6easibte, shalt be given equal consideration with the needs o6 .interstate commence. In the metropolitan area aft these events had a major indtuence on the overat development o6 the 6&eeuny system. The ptesentty planned network was developed 64om a sen.i.es o6 economic, engineering, and t4a66ic studies undertaken by ptannerte and engineers rep2ebenting various tevets o6 government, and augmented by independent studies carried out by eonsuttants and study commissions. Since demands and desires o6 tra66ic arts the major justi6ieatlon sort the location and const.urtion o6 any highway an objective approach 6or determining route torations and roadway rtequirements is based on two essential ptanning pL.inciptea: - -Studies o6 route requirements must be su66icientty comprehensive to include kknowr and anticipated transportation demands sort the area encompassing art activities generating travel on the &cute or routes being considered. - -The in6tuence o6 individual communities on cats within the tna66ia generating area is considered to the extent to which activities per6oamed therein contribute touands the overacl economic, social, and travel demand. It is a basic premise that the social and economic wren -being o6 an area depends to a very high degree on e66ici.ent and rapid transportation. For this reason, evaluation o6 bene6its and inconveniences likely to be created in each cell a66ected by the location and design o6 each segment o6 network is required. These ptineiptes augmented by the need to: - -Harmonize with the existing environment white producing an asset to community development; and --PRov.ide a 6amility which wilt 4uppott and enhance community goals and objectives white sertving conrunity-wide tanspontation needs wens utiti'ed in the derf.in.ition and development oh the 6n.eeutzy netwokk in the metropolitan atm. The general tocation to be hollowed by interstate toutes through and adjacent to the ?nneapotis-St. Paul area was basically established in a Federtal Highway Administration publication oh September 1955 entitled, "Generta.t Location oh National System oh Interstate Highways". In the St. Paul area two ptineipat Routes were designated. One ie a north -south Routt designated as Interstate Route 35, 6rtom Atbent Lea North to Due"th. The second is an east -west koute designated Interstate Route 94 extending east frtom Fatgo, North Dakota to Hudson, Wisconsin. Interstate 35, apptoaehing fRom the south, separates in Burnsville to Ohm Intertstatee 35E and 35W. These 'function as majo' dietnibutorts sertving the downtown areas o6 St. Paul and Minneapotis, reepectiveLy. They Rejoin north oh the Twin Cities, near Forest Lake, h,tom which point Interstate 35 proceeds north to serve the Duluth-Supeniok area. Flom its junction in Bunnavitte I-35E passes nontheastentu through the southern suburbs o6 Apple Valley, Eagan Township, and Mendota Heights, traverses St. Paut, and selves the northern suburbs oh Littte Canada, Vadnaie Heights, and White Bean Lake. The uncompleted po/Lti.on of I-35E within St. Paut tiaa in a conridot Roughly hollowing Pleasant Avenue between West Seventh Stteet and the Capitot Approach saes. The selection 04 the location of I-35E was based on a survey o6 alt known quantihiabte determinants to include: --Tad6ie Deeine Lines --Topogaphieal Features --Existing and Planned Tanspontation Facilities --Operation and 1la.intenance Costs --Acquisition and Development Coats --Social, Economic and Political Stnuctunee --Ecological Factota --Historical Features - -PReeent and PRojected Land Uses and Tab6ic Ways - -Permanent AReae and Features to Remain --Areas where Redevelopment oft Change was DesinabLe It was located to respond as fully ae possible to the existing St. Paut Development and to describe fort the metropolitan area a untkable system hoA reasonabty high-speed traffic movement. Access to and hrtom the Central Business District was based on the princtpte that the essence o6 the business dietrtiet is its concentn..ti.on 06 services and 6acifi.ti.ee. That this concentration, and thus the District's vitality, can be lessened by an oven -abundance oh hReeuuy entrances and exits. - 3 - It uus located to cause .the least damage to existing communitu social and economic activities and at the same time provide good traffic service at teaeonabte costs. The I-35E tocation uus strtongty influenced hu the existing gain of the St. Paul Tanepontat.ion patten.ns. That is the neomettic pattern 04 the existing st'eet parallel patterns o6 Shepard Road, West Seventh St et and Lexington Avenue. The influence oh topogaphy also played a significant pant in the selection of the hrteeway location. The natural barrt.iert suggested by the Pleasant Avenue Hilt and the existing Railroad tracks in the Ieffenson-St. Clain Avenue area ptovided a naturtat attraction fob the 4/Leeway tocation. The emphasis on teaat physicat neighborhood and commznitu activitrr disruption dictated a very t.imi,ted cortrt.idok width. Feather elements invotved in the Location selection included comraatibititu of encouag.ing the muttipte use of the /Light oh way and eventual utilization by rubber -tired mass trtaneit. A42ttiple use envisions the highuny as but one occupant of the Right of way Land. But use o6 a conrtidort fort other purposes such as industry, commence, or Recreation depends in Lange part on the commitment 496 the community to these objectives. The note of the 6rteeauay as a means foA a Rubbea-tined mass tansit euetem is not incon- sistent with the overall goals o6 the metropolitan aaea. The rteatity 04 two majok downtown areas, severe winter weather conditions and tow -density Residential development hetped to dictate this form of mass transit Rather than a fixed guideway type system. Recent metropolitan council development guide decisions indicate the importtant Rote that hrteewzys must play in the ovenai tnanapoktati.on system in the metropolitan anew. While art these factor¢ aided in the development of the I-35E concept, it is obvious that its successful implementation woutd not have been poesibte on the basis of a uni.latenat e64ont on the part of the Highwuu Departtment. Highway planning and design must be considered a joint ventute between City, County and State governments in cooperation with rteg.ionat planning agencies. Throughout the planning glosses we have attempted to make infortmation on ptopoeats available to government agencies and to civic and other organizations. Considelaabte consultation, input, and dialogue have occurred throughout not onto the development of the I-35E conridoa, but also the entire metropolitan freeway system. Inputs frtom Federtat, State, Regional and Local Agencies, civic organizations, and citizens grtoups aft played an important note in the 6Reewzy tocation. These inputs and contacts are embodied in the vartious approvals and administrative actions taken throughout the history 04 the conrtidor. These expression of invotvement have taken the fortm 06 approvate 6rtom the State Planning Agency, Methopot.itan Council, Federal Highcuzy Admin.istrtntion and on 35 di64enent occasions the St. Paut City Council has passed Resolutions having direct effect on I-35E within its municipal limits. - 4 - EN =III MIN U NMI = MR -r UM MO i i M Civic and private involvement has taken the 6onm o6 presentations, persona/ contacts, and direct input contacts with various groups and associations. We have documented almost 66 di66erent meetings since 1967. Municipal' involvement in the development o6 the 1-35E corn.idon, through redevelopment plans, nestruted building permits, etc., has insured a controlled and compatible development. This coordination and considerable community input has played a majors note in the overall connidon development. The 6inal plan bon Kellogg Boulevard and the Trunk Highway 94 connectors id a nesutt o6 the commitment o6 St. Paul to the urban reneunt ptognam and civic center development. The resuttant changes in the municipal etneet system, such as West Seventh Street, and the Shepard Road connection should provide adequate tna66ic simulation. These changes in the municipal atkeet system are under the jurisdiction o6 the City o6 St. Paul with no involvement by the Minnesota Highway Department. The end kesutt o6 this planning and cooperation has been the passage o6 the mentioned aeries o6 nesolutLons expteas.ing municipat approval 06 pertinent ptetimuwny plans. These preceding nemanks have dealt mainly with the history, logic, and validity 06 the eetection o6 I-35E and its note in the transpontati.on system 06 the metropolitan anea. But what o6 the vatidiity o6 I-35E and move tmpontantty the 6/Leeway system in the metkopotitan area in 1973? It is oun 6inm belie, that we should, at this point in time, complete the hew rtemaining segments o6 the 6/Leeway system in the Twin Cities metropolitan anew. it is atso out 6inm bette6 that a cleat majority o6 the peopte in the Twin Cities and the surrounding metnopotitan anew wont these twain.* segments o6 the ,recency systems completed. The planned total ukban system o6 tntetetate 6rteeway's was devetoped with each route ca/te6ully accommodating particular major tra66ic movement patterns. Let me emphasize that this is a total system, not independent roadways. Failure to complete this system by not onstruet.ing the tact hew key vital /inks, id in ,act, telting the two majok cities that the overloads on what is now completed wilt be so great as to no.wlt in breakdown o6 tka66ic movement doting peak periods. These major tra66ic ptobteas wilt ocean tong be6one the planning and development o6 a/tetnate tnanspar.tation systems can take place. We do not ma,inta.in that the urban 6neeway system, when completed, wilt ,unction as the singte tnanepontat.ion system, but rather, must be supptemented by an e66eeti.ve atteknative to the automobile; namely a transit system. It should be pointed out that the State Highway Department has, 6nom the very beginning o6 transportation ptanniing in the mett.opotitan area, ptayed a a.igni6ica,tt, supportive, hetp6ul, and coopekative note in the development o6 sophisticated ttans.it planning activities. The President o6 the United States put this challenge in these wends; "We are now enteAing into a new era in transportation -- an era which out national mobility will demand the continued conquest o6 time and apace; yet out - 5 - nationat conscience wilt no !engen permit intepcinabee damage to owl lane, can environment, on the social 6abric o6 ou,t communities. It is in this tight thattAanspontation ,aces its challenue o6 the 6utun.." The Minnesota Highway Department strongly supports the concept o6 a balanced tnaneportat.ion system. In ondek to accomplish this balanced transportation system each mode must be utilized in those amounts that witt achieve an ovenall system in which all etements complement -- rather than duplicate on compete with one another. A balanced tnanshantation system must be designed to meet the total ttanspattation needs o6 urban areas, and should do so in a way that wift ptevide the most e66icient, e66ective satie6actony and economic sekvice attainable. In bnte6, then, a balanced tranepontatien system must give 6utl weight to the pte6enencee and needs o6 art the residents o6 an urban anea -- hi./e at the same time being responsive to the ovekatt goals, objectives, needs, and 6.iseal capability o6 the community. As a Department o6 Highways we believe we have taken the initial step in the night direction. The technotogy o6 operation and utilization o6 noaduays is beginning to take the ,Darn o6 metered 6neeways, pre6etentia.t bus ayetem6, automated in6ortmati.on systems, automated .in6onmation systems, automated eignat contact systems sensitive to trah6.i.c demand, and highway planning that incapacitates cona.idekations 6or 6utune transit. We as a Department o6 Highways weke one o6 the 6inet across the nation to 6onm a transportation and transit planning and ptognamming division. We continue to attest. the concepts o6 comprehensive, coopelw.tive and continuing planning. We as a Department work on a continuous basis with othek ptanning agencies such as the Statewide Planning 066ice, Metropolitan Council, Metropolitan Transit Commission and other Local and neg&onat unite o6 government. American tkansporttation policy has tkaditienatty ahi6ted emphasis with changing needs, and now the impending comptetion o6 the interstate highway ptog4am o66era another oppontun.i,ty to tape stock o6 where we ate and where we are going in highway afi6ains. It is important that each review take place su66icientty in advance o6 the compteLion o6 the ptognam to pekm.it necessary changes to be made in an ondekty, :tathet than an abrupt, manner. - 6 e 1 t f a A t APPENDIX 3 PRELIMINARY STATEMENT BY RESIDENTS IN PROTEST OVER I-35E (RIP 35E) A. 3-1 - A. 3-27 A.3-1 A Preliminary Statement on the behalf of Residents in Protest Against I-35E Prepared by: Thomond R. O'Brien Frank B. Martin A.3-2 Introductory Note The following report was prepared as a general background statement to be included in the draft Environmental Impact Statement prepared by the Walter Butler Engineering firm. It constitues in no way a formal reply to the Butler Report. A much more detailed and critical analysis will be prepared after the draft statement has been made public. A.3-3 1. Brief Description of R.I.P.-35E. a. Formation of R.I.P. The group known as R.I.P.-35E ("Residents in Protest Against Interstate- 37E") was formed in March 1972 as citizens of various neighborhoods affected by the proposed roadway came to realize their common concern. As we studied the harmful effects of the freeway on each neighborhood, we perceived that if each group were to ask for modifications beneficial only to that neigh- borhood, we might most likely be whipped lashed by the Minnesota Highway Department into battles of one neighborhood against another, and the freeway would be built substantially as designed. We decided that the best course of action, albeit the potentially most dangerous for if we failed all would be lost, would be to attempt to halt the construction of the freeway in its entirety. We then agreed to formalize our group, to ask for support from existing neighborhood councils, and to publicize our concern. The formal R.I.P. Executive Committee was set up consisting of representatives from each of the four affected neighborhoods1 the councils of which enthusiasti- cally backed our actions. b. Political Action As the City of St. Paul was then in the midst of an election campaign for City Council, the Committee decided to make the candi.dates aware of our position. We prepared a large map showing the Highway Departments design and another large map presenting the R.I.P. proposal, and we also prepared informational fact sheets to be handed out to the candidates and the vari- ous audiences at neighborhood candidate meetings. Our proceedure was to hand the fact sheets to a candidate and to tell him that we would be asking 1. The Summit Hill Ass'n, the Ramsey Hill Ass'n, the West Seventh St. Ass'n, and the South Lexington Ass'n. These associations represent approximately 25,000 households. A.3- 4 him questions at the next meeting. By the end of the campaign, all the major candidates had expressed support for our position. In the meanwhile, a formal resolution was prepared for passage by the St. Paul City Council which stated that the City was to withdraw any approval of future Highway Department plans until public hearings could be held and to seek to withdraw any prior approval for freeway design. 0n April 20, 1972, before one of the largest crowds ever to appear before the Council, the City Council voted unanimously to approve the resolution, only to have the Mayor veto the action. Two days after the election, on April 25th, the Council again voted unanimously to overrule the lame duck Mayor. The R.I.P. committee next devoted its attention to a forthcoming public meeting with the Highwayway Department. As this would be the first public meeting held on the issues of the freeway since December 12, 1956, we attached considerable importance to the meeting. At the 1956 meeting, the entire freeway network for the Metropolitan area was presented, and less than 100 words were spoken on the subject of I-35E from the Capital Approach area south to Burnsville. The day before our meeting, the St. Paul Dispatch devoted a major feature articlel on R.I.P. and the freeway. As a consequence, the May 10t meeting was filled with over 150 invited and uninvited citizens. The transcript of this meeting has been prepared by the Highway Department. It demonstrates the concern the neighborhoods have concerning the safety of the freeway, its noise implications, its effects on hospitals, schools, parks and playgrounds, plus numerous other social and environmental issues. The transcript also demonstrates that the personnel of the Highway Department were not well versed on subjects other than "engineering" features, and even 1. St. Paul Dispatch, May 9, 1972, pages 1, 14 and 15. A copy is included in the appendix. A.3-5 then they could not offer expertice on the Capital Approach design problems, noise reduction programs, landscaping details, access problems, cost of construction, etc., despite the fact that the roadway had been under design for twenty years. 2. Legal Battles. Early in June, two members of the R.I.P. committee flew to Washington. D.C. to attend the National Coalition on the Transportation Crisis (NCTC) conven- tion being conducted there. At this convention, a number of experts spoke on the social, economic, environmental and legal aspects of freeways. We were particularly impressed by the need to initiate a strong legal case against the Highway Department citing possible violations of PPM 20-8 ("Public Hearings") and PPM90-1 ("Environmental Impact"), as well as other possible technical violations of local, state or national law. Upon the return of the two delegates, the R.I.P. committee authorized our lawyer, Mr. D. D. Wozniak, to proceed with the drafting of a legal brief. Mr. Wozniak, on our behalf, approached the City Council to ask if they wanted to join the R.I.P. plantiffs in the suit. To our great delight, the Council said it would not join us only as a named plantiff, but would assume a major role provided its legal council found a) that there was a basis in law for the suit, and b) that the suit stood a good chance of being won by the City. The legal council later stated that both conditions were favor- able, and on July 18, 1972, the City Council voted unanimously to join R.I.P. in the suit. On August 2, 1972, "the City of St. Paul joined eight individuals and four neighborhood associations Tuesday in filing suit in St Paul Federal Court asking an injunction against further construction of I-35E."1 The Court 1.St. Paul Pioneer. Press, August 2, 1972, page 1. A.3 - 6 ordered a hearing to be held on August 22 for the defendants (Federal, State and local Highway officials) to show cause why the Highway Department should not be constrained from further construction until it had complied with certain requirements, the most important being those covered by PPM 20-8 and PPM 90-1. 0n August 18, the Highway Department reached an out of court settlement with Mr. Wozniak which called for a halt in further construction, the preparation of an E.I.S. statement, and for public hearings to be held. 3. The Butler Meetings. Shortly after the Out of Court stipulation was issued, Governor Wendell R. Anderson announced that the Walter Butler Engineering Firm of St. Paul would prepare the Environmental Impact Statement. Members of R.I.P. were amazed at the announcement for it has been often reported that Mr. Butler has been for years a major supporter of the Governor's own political party, and that his firm had, in fact, prepared the detailed engineering study for the High- way Department in 1956 for I-35E from the Lexington Avenue Bridge to Duke Street. Because of R.I.P.'s acknowledged interest in the E.I.S. report, the Highway Department agreed that the Butler firm and R.I.P. would meet once a week to discuss the E.I.S. report , and to mutually explore the many sensitive environmental factors of concern to the neighborhoods. At the initial meeting, on September 5, Mr. Butler assured us that his firm had been given a free hand by the Highway Department, that their previous work on 35E would not prejudice this study, and that furthermore, if there were serious areas of concern, his firm would conduct independent studies, for he recognized that his firm had the financial backing of the State, whereas the R.I.P. A.3-7 group was severely handicapped in presenting independent expert testimony. A major portion of the first few meetings was spent on defining the scope of the E.I.S. report. Several members of R.I.P. argued that the entire 23 miles of the uncompleted section of 35E from downtown St. Paul to Burnsville should be included.1 The Butler firm contended that they were chargedonly with the responsibility of the downtown to Lexington Bridge section. The R.I.P. group contered that one of the requirements of PPM 90-1 was to study the alternative of no freeway at all, and that would at least require the study of the necessity of freeways or no freeways in Dakota County. The Butler firm agreed they would make such an appraisal, and we agreed to limiting our discussion primarily to the St. Paul segment of 35E, but reserv- ing our right to comment on the Dakota portion. Almost immediately, the R.I.P. group ran into difficulties with the Butler firm over the use of outside consultants. Some of these areas of concern were: a) origin 7 destination studies, b) soil stability problems, c) noise pollution, d) air pollution, and e) the unique social qualities of the four various neighborhoods. None of these areas were investigated by independent consultants hired by Butler, as far as we could learn. The Butler firm did, however, conduct a public opinion poll which cost $10,000 that we never asked for and the validity of which we will undoubtably question. For the most part, the Butler-R.I.P. meetings were tempestuous affairs, with the R.I.P. group repeatedly trying to demonstate the harm the freeway would have on the neighborhoods and city. The Butler people quietly persevered with a neutrality which was remarkable. 1. 0f major concern are these questions: a. No E.I.S. on the 18 miles of 35E South of Lexington Bridge. b. No E.I.S. on the $50 million interchange of 35E-55-494. c. This section conflicts with Metropolitan Council guidelines. d. The entire.Metro freeway pattern must be considered as this section may be superfluous, redundant or obsolete. A.3-8 In recent months, the R.I.P. group has spoken to many civic and social groups, held fund raising "tea" parties, attic sales and neighborhood fund drives. In addition, it hired a professional noise consultant and has per- formed its own noise generation and decible intensity study.1 It has also maintained contact with other national, state and local groups fighting freeway construction. It plans to produce a major critique of the Butler report after the report has been made public and public hearings have been held. 1. St. Paul Dispatch, May 15, 1973,page 11,"I-35E Serves as Stage for Automobile Rock 'n' Roll". A.3-9 STATEMENT ON IMPACT This statement is intended to'describe the issues which the citizens regard as important in the case against completion of this leg of 35-E. Documentation will be available under seperate cover prior to public hearings and in the expert testimony presented during the hearings. We assume that the reader is by now familiar with the question and we will merely make refer- ence to the aerial photo., Exhibit A in the Butler Co., text. I THE ENVIRONMENT RESIDENTIAL The entire length of the disputed section of 35-E bisects a core city residential area bounded by the C.B.D. to the East, Mississippi River to the South, a Federal Housing Authority Urban Renewal District to the North, and somewhat indefinitely by the Highland Park neighborhood to the West. The age of buildings ranges from prior to statehood to built within the last year. The quality and cost of dwelling units ranges from the highest in the city to a small area adjacent to the C.B.D. which is being systematically rehabilitated with federal programs. The area is geographically divided by the Mississippi River Valley bluff (identical with the right of way on Exhibit A) into above (A) and below (B). A further usefull classification will be interns of Old (0) dating from 1860 to 1910 and New (N) being largely post W.W. II. The bluff side has preserved an open area in the center of tke tv -i;id w ..ate C'ap4. . possesses high amenity value and adds to the setting of A.3 -10 Although subjected to the numerous and typical core city threats this area is phenomenally well preserved and vigorously striving to remain healthy and appealing. At this time the City of St. Paul is loosing population at an alarming rate and members of the local government are calling for a special commission to try to deal with it. This area is a socially valuable reservoir of affordable housing which also has quality. Neighborhood (B,N) is made up of many blocks of relatively new but well built and modestly sized homes in excellent condition. HISTORICAL AREA Neighborhood (A,0) contains the mansions and architectually unique homes of the people who economically, culturally, and politically built the State. It is described by the Minnesota Historical Society as the premier location in the State for preservation, and is becoming nationally recognized for the fact that its original character is still in tact and does not have to be reinvented. To have 1900 one would only need to put horses back into the carriage barns. Its value to the City and State requires vision to be understood. The area is threatened by its core location and must remain a high quality place to live. Houses in disrepair must attract buyers with the resources and interest to put them right and maintain them. BUS IN1 SSES To a large extent business in the area consists of smaller retailers who depend on the vitality and buying power of their more immediate area. They are primarily located on or along Grand Avenue and West Seventh Street. A.3-11 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Adjacent to the C.B.J. and fronting the river there are industrial enter- prises. CULTURAL INSTITUTIONS The area has a remarkably high number of churches which are either flourishing or showing new vigor. The very large institutions with plants valued in excess of $10,000,000.00 were built by well established congre- gations. These churches are going to have to very soon face the fact that the traditional sources of their support are aging and dispersing. They must be able to rely on their environment as a sustaining force. PARKS Park acreage is extremely limited and all of it is within several hundred feet of the right of way. The bluff top parks present very large scale scenic overlooks and have high value for passive use. They are 70 feet above several hundred feet removed from the center line of the proposed road. SCHOOLS All 7 schools on the valley floor are within 500 feet of the planned road. The sight available and well located for the nieghborhoods recently bonded consolidated elementary school is entirely within 500 feet of the center line. HOSPITALS There are 4 hospitals within 200 feet of the right of way. One might say that they are adjacent to the proposed road. This may be one of few A.3 -12 attempts in the country to locate an industrial expressway within 100 feet of an intensive care ward. THE C.B.D. The western edge of the C.B.D. contains the large Civic Center complex and otherwise redevelopable property. Access to the Civic Center via the freeway is regarded as a critical issue. It will be pointed out here that completion of 35-E actually destroys presently available access and adds none. THE FREEWAY ITSELF With 74,000 and more vehicles and the presently high levels of use on I-94, the capitol weave interchange will create congestion. The planned segment of 35-E constantly changes grade, has sharp turns and considerable weaving and merging of lanes. It is similar in all these details to the segment of I-94 between the Twin City C.B.D.s which carried approximately 0.9% of the vehicle miles driven in state and sustained approximately 1% of the crashed vehicles in the state. Its adequacy as a freeway must be ques- tioned. A non frivolous aspect of the road is the introductry view of the city it affords the visitor. If any noise abatement is to be attempted it will be in the form of lids and walls. A motorist will think he has wandered into a- aqueduct. A.3.13 t 1 1 1 1 1 II EXPECTED BENEFITS OF 35-E TO THE CITY Increased utilization and expansion of commercial space in the C.B.D. due to More people. Certain citizens will be able to utilize the road as an increased convenience in getting to regular destinations. A opening of direct routes to planned suburban retailing centers for those dwelling in the city who drive autos. TO THE COUNTRY Suburban dwellers in the county will be better able to live on one side of the city and work and shop on the other, thus creating increased mobility. Rush hour congestion may however sour this. Important to the City and County is increased industrial access. Of particular concern is access from the South to the area midway between and above the two C.B.D.s. Unfortunately completion of this leg of 35-E is able to offer practically nothing. TO DEVELOPMENT IN ADJACENT COUNTIES The economic benefits are had by developers on the edge. 35-E is viewed by some individuals to the South of St. Paul as an inalienable right. Cer- tainly a great deal of speculation depends on the freeways. Consider the fact that Minnesota Highway Department has presented a proposal for the world's third largest (in acres) interchange in an area of Dakota County which is presently rural and under cultivation. A.3-14 III SOURCES OF IMPACT 1. NOISE Beside the intrusion of the structure itself noise may be the most noticable effect. The bluff side terrain on which the road is to be located is a complete disaster for any attempts to hold back the roar. Laminar air movements, breezes and reflecting surfaces can come together to give better sound carrying properties than the Hollywood Bowl. The narrow right of way can only accommodate walls as it passes residential streets at second story level in the neighborhood below the bluff. From above the bluff there is no reasonably assure answer short of walls with breath taking heights. 2. AIR EMISSIONS The congestion created by the weave will add significantly to the chemi- cal load in the downtown city air. Present monotering is felt to be inade- quate so the whole issue requires serious investigation (some of it empir- ical) in light of P.C.A. 1975 rules. Cars idling in sound abatement tunnels may create emission levels requiring forced air ventilation. 3. TRANQUILITY DEMOLISHED The passive nature of the several limited and valuable scenic over look parks will be seriously intruded upon. A recent decision to spend an addi- tional 05,500,00.00 in highway funds to protect a passive 35 acre park in Minneapolis, suggests that tranquility is presently worth $160,000.00 per acre. A.3 -15 4. PROPERTY DEVALUATION Homes either side of the planned road and above and below the bluff will suffer a devaluation of approximately 15%. The city looses tax base and quality. In particular the very expensive bluff top homes will suffer about 30% loss in value. Their high prices support the value of property in the neighborhoods surrounding them. A wave of devaluation will lower tax base and critically injure the social and financial structure required for preservation. 5. EROSION OF SUPPORT FOR INSTITUTIONS The churches will suffer (a number of them fatally) the loss of sus- taining support if their congregations change financially downward. 6. CHANGE The old part of the area immediately adjacent to both sides of the road harbours 88 registered historical buildings in their natural setting. A large portion of it has just become the second site in state to be desig- nated an historical area by the Legislature. The boundry was altered to exclude the right of way. One fact which can be easily agreed upon is that freeways can induce changes in land use. 7. CONGESTION The city bus route arterials which cross and are connected to the road cannot in some cases handle the projected traffic flow. Their utility as public transportation routes would be deminished. The interchange with I-94 has been mentioned elsewhere. A.3-16 8. LOSS OF LEADERSHIP One of the foremost ills of large cities is the fact that most of their social, economic, and community leadership as well as the upper middle class have deserted them for the suburbs. In Saint Paul, a viable contingent of this group still resides in the area under discussion here. The newer gener- ation must also be induced to stay. Convenience and quality of life are the inducements. To seriously damage this quality and destroy this trend is not an act worthy of reasonable men. IV NREnS The city needs people downtown and not autos. The city needs to protect and defend the quality of life still intact in a large part of its core. St. Paul needs better industrial access but this leg of 35-E offers pitifully little. The city needs to have a North to South connection from the Port Authority Industrial Park. A direct connection of the Layfette freeway bridge (the abruptly ending road just east of the C.B.D. on Exhibit A) North to 35-E is called for. ALTERNATIVES Many alternatives must be studied carefully including the possiblity of no construction. The utilization of all present construction as a commuter and bus access to but not thru the Hospitals and C.B.D. will satisfy the city's needs with- out destroying her. A good industrial access to the C.B.D. can be had with A.3-17 modest expense on Shepard road. 35-E from the North can be used to access the Civic Center and Western edge of the C.B.D. The proper connection of 35-E and the Layfette freeway will provide industrial access North to South. The present right of way should be finished to boulevard scale with very limited access for its short distance. It will be the needed rush hour arterial. The remaining part of the right of way should be landscaped into a linear park system connecting downtown to the extensive river front natural or wild areas. Turn the Hospitals area into a medical campus and professional buildings. The amenity value of the linear park connection will then make high quality residential redevelopment a important possibility in the core city. This alternative removes only the straight shot thru the center of town and provides superior commercial and industrial access with consideration for mass transit developments. Missing is the high cost extracted from the city by using her as thoroughfare rather than a center. There is no means locally available for compensating her and we the citizens demand for her a better fate. A.3 -18 APPENDIX "A" A Copy of the St. Paul Dispatch May 9, 1972 Pages 1, 14, & 15 A.3-19 I -3 5 E Route Safe, Well -Planned Design, Officials Say By ROBERT WHERE/UT Staff Writer "That wasn't just a random choice. It was very well thought out," said Asst. Highway Commissioner Francis Marshall. He was talking about the 3.7 miles of Interstate 35E, now under construction and under fire from area resi- dents who object to the six -lane freeway. The segment of the metropolitan area interstate sys- tem has been in the talking and planning stage since the early 1950s and the land acquisition stage since the early 1960s. Construction has been under way for more than a year. SUDDENLY, IN 1972, residents on either side of the freeway's path are organizing opposition. Some simply don't want it; others want major changes. They have formed neighborhood groups. hired a law• yer and mounted a vocal campaign against the project and against the Minnesota Highway Department The neighborhood groups or various voices within the groups demand the machinery of construction be halted, the project abandoned. They propose routing 1- 35E into downtown St. Paul along Shepard Road on the banks of the Mississippi River. OTHERS DEMAND elimination of all interchanges between Kellogg and W. 7th, prohibiting truck traffic on the interstate, redesigning of certain sections, lowering the grade to stifle noise, cutting the number of lanes, even covering the entire stretch to cut out the noise and sight of the project which will affect home life. And it could. The segment, while relatively short, is a massive project costing millions of dollars. It has eight inter- changes, forks and ramp networks, 18 vehicle bridges, some already standing, and three pedestrian bridges. IT BEGINS at W. 7th Street as a continuation of 1- 35E that snakes in from the southwest, across the Mis- (O0.er Stories, Pages 14, 15) sissippi. It starts north at W. 7th, paralleling S. Lexing- ton Parkway, then northeast along the line of old Pleas- ant Avenue at the base of the bluffs to Kellogg Boule- vard. It is to connect with 1-94 and 1-35E just south of the State Capitol. Department officials and St. Paul leaders are more than a little concerned. They ask: Where were the protestors during the planning stage? When they were given opportunities for public hearings on the designing? During City Council meetings when plans were ap- proved? The land acquisition has been going on so long that department officials do not have readily available fig- ures on how many homes have been taken. Wall over 100, they say, adding it would take a search of contracts and computers to be precise. AND NOW the furor. The Highway Department feels its case is solid. This segment of I.35E is vital, according to Asst. Commissioner Marshall. It should not be stopped, aban- doned or relocated, he says. "We feel we should complete the interstate system," he said. "The separate routes weren't designed as sepa- rate routes, If we don't complete the whole system, we'll have overloads on the whole system." Turrs.to Page 15, Col. 6 Good Evening ST. I'.1CL .4'.D VICINITY Cloudy, cool d,nin::-d Wednesday. Low tonight. 45; hy1 xednesday, 60. flour e 7 t 1 :0 11 12 1 S Temp. N 45 50 53 :a 60 61. 62' s2• -Unofficial. Year aLo ' .0. 71; low 4L iofxfr Tonight / VOTER'S CU,E in the �v.i.aw.ar+.rr /Inad' MW I..A,I.,Y.n. Y17N svYa Y.W wM .. w.... w Sections a 104t1 YEAR —NO. 319 .478 a 50 PAGES ST. PAUL, MINN., TUESDAY, MAY 9. 1972 r :r e".,,"• PRICE 10 CENT Too Late to Abandon 1-35E, Say Defenders Continued from Page 1 William C. Merritt is the chief engineer for District 9 of the highway depart- ment. District 9 is in charge of construction and maintenance of state highways and interstate roads in the metro area. Kermit McRae is the as- sistant engineer for Dis- trict 9. The route and actual de- sign, Merritt and McRae said, are the results of careful planning with the city of St, Paul and care- ful engineering. McRAE SAID the route along the Milwauk ee tracks was selected be- cause there were few homes and it would mini- mize the disruption of families. The base of the bluff was chosen, he said, because it was a natural topographical b a r r i e r, would not divide a com- munity and would provide a sound barrier. A s s t. Commissioner Marshall agreed with that assessment and s a i d: "That just wasn't a ran- dom choice. It was well thought out." He said the department was "judi- cious" in its route selec- tion. Department officials emphasize that it is not "their" interstate, that it was planned and coordi- nated with city officials and the city Public Works Department. 'THE I N T E R- CHANGES are there as a result of city planning and city needs." McRae said. "The pedestrian bridges (three of them) are a di- rect result of the munici- pality. They asked for them." Most of the bridges that have been built or are nlanned are aimed at con- tinuing the city's street nattern, he said. The bridges provide a mini- mum of traffic disruption and allow safe passage for pedestrians, according to McRae. "I think we considered this (safety) as a factor. It seems in this segment. by the sheer number of bridges and pedestrian bridges. we provided the same network of street fa- cilities as they had be- fore." THE SEGMENT is safe for vehicles. too. accord- ing to McRae. "From a design standpoint ... this interchange spacing as proposed is a safe de- sign." The number and lo- cations. he said, are re- quired to serve the west end community and the city street network. St. Paul Chief Engineer Richard Schnarr agrees with much of what McRae and Merritt contended. "On this system. I would have to say that this is the alignment that was laid out by the city many years ago," he said. Part of the aim of the 1- 35E segment was to mini- mize the property that MERRITT would have to be taken. "Under the c i r cu m- stances. you couldn't have selected a better idea as far as what was going to be taken. "THE ON AND off - ramps," said Schnarr, "were pretty well request- ed and worked out by city government. They weren't an arbitrary decision made by the highway de- partment." The route, Schnarr said, "is as good as any. If you had a new game and were starting over, you might consider some place else. It seems difficult new to take the position that you're going to stop the whole thing." Schnarr and the high- way department do not share that view alone. There are downtown eco- nomic interests involved. "Basically, we are con- cerned because the high- way has been long planned." said Amos Mar. tin. executive secretary of the St. Paul Area Cham- ber of Commerce. MUCH OF THE down- town redevelopment, in- cluding Capitol Center. was started in recognition of the eventual freeway link. "Transportation and the location of the freeway were important factors in the decision of downtown leaders to go ahead with this massive redevelop- ment." he said. Howard Lindow, chair- man of the chamber's public transportation committee. said "the civic center depends on 35E. Tb have a viable center you have to bring highways into the city." WHAT ABOUT routing the interstate along She- pard Road? McRae: "In terms of de- sign, Shepard Road would provide problems. She- pard Road consideration would require some revi- sion in the existing sys- tem as well as the nonex- isting (planned interstate) system and city street system." Marshall: "I would think it would be very dif- ficult to put a divided freeway in there. You have some constraints there. You have a river on one side and some very big facilities on the oth- er." Schnarr: "You would have to move the grain el- evators (at Chestnut Street). You'd have trou- ble under the high bridge. You'd be crowding (the NSP) plant, but I don't know if you'd have to re- move it." THOSE WHO FAVOR the existing location or the interstatc emphasize that things can be worked out. The highway department, in an attempt to resolve differences. will meet with representatives of neighborhood group s Wednesday night. City of- ficials have been invited, too. Merritt and McRae note the department has al- tered contracts to comply with residents' requests. The interstate in the W. 7th Street area is being lowered, walls construct- ed and landscaping em- ployed to reduce noise. Perhaps more of this can be done, they indicate. McRAE "We recognize there are problems on any highway project of this type," Mar- tin said. "The chamber is willing to work with groups to improve access, landscaping and meet some of their concerns." BUT THERE Is not that much rosy optimism. Interstates have been stopped by people power, even interstates that have been well under construc- tion. A. 3-21 Compromise May End Road Impasse By KARL KARISON Staff Writer To the angry people in the afflicted areas where f- 35E cuts through St. Paul, the city councils April 20 res- olution was a victory. The council members, five days before the city elec- tion, seemed to promise the citizens that the council would stop construction of the freeway. The resolution, adopted unanimously, stated that an- other route was available and put the council on record against the up -down. curved route from West 7th Street to I.94. It declared the council's intention to withhold ap- proval of Highway Department plans and seek to with- draw previous approval given the road. The same city council affirmed its action two days after the election by overriding a mayoral veto of the resolution. Since then, several council members have backed away from the resolution although continuing to express support and sympathy for the crowd that appeared at the city council April 20 demanding the council do some- thing. And work continues on the road. Mayor -elected Lawrence Cohen has indicated the resolution to halt construction of the road may be a good idea. "We can compare the freeway to the SST (superson- ic transport). They say we can't stop the road now be- cause it has gone too far, but they (Congress) stopped the SST despite an investment of millions," he said. "Just because they've gone this far doesn't justify further destruction of neighborhoods," Cohen said. Only one council member took any direct action to follow up the resolution. Roger Conway, who was not re- elected, withdrew the blasting permit of the construction firm on the day the resolution was passed. However. the permit was reissued May 1 after Con- way received a letter from the Highway Department District 9 Engineer's office saying Conway might be held liable for any loss encountered by the contractor if the contract terms were not met. Conway's deputy. Gary Norstrem. said the letter in- dicated Conway needed a legal reason for witholding the permit, and they could find none. The April 20 resolution was in direct contrast with a resolution passed by the same council August 13, 1971 calling for the council to "take all possible action to in. sure completion of the highway system at a date con- current with the completion of the Civic Center Multi- purpose Arena facility." The author of that resolution, Dean Meredith. said the April 20 appearance of citizens at the council meet- ing "was a distinct surprise to me." "The routes were approved before my lime 119641 on Turn to Page 15, Col. f Compromise May Offer Road Solution Continued From Page 14 the council." Meredith said. "There appears to be areas of compromise between the people and the Highway De- partment. The resolution was a good way to getting the attention of the department." To Leonard Levine, the opposition was no surprise he said noting that his basic campaign issued in 1970 was "the destruction of neighborhoods and homes by such a freeway (Hwy, 212, which was stopped)." Levine said the city and people have had changes in altitudes toward freeways since the roads were planned 15 years ago. He pointed out that many freeway -connect- ed city projects have been protested and killed. "We were asked to widen several city streets to han- dle freeway overflow, but we have not done so and will not do so." he said. "The city and people can't take this kind of destruc- tion for the benefit of those who doen't live here," he said. However. he said that many people affected by the present route have indicated that a compromise would be acceptable and "with certain changes. they could live with that street. "But my feeling is that the destruction cause by free- ways is so great that it cannot be measured," he said. "We should look at the great cost of changing the thing as ,an investment we ought to make before we put in a lasting road like this which could drive people out of their homes and minds," he said. Rosalie Butler said the leg:A weight of the resolution might be nil and called it a notice the the Highway De- partment that the city wants it to sit down with the peo- ple "and give the people the relief they want." "The prospects of getting the highway stopped cold don't took good." she said. "but the highway commis- sioner (Ray Lappegaard I told me he's more than willing to talk about the road and make changes." She said the council must learn the full ramafica- lions of withholding approval in means of the land al- ready taken. contracts and future highway development. Victor Tedesco said the flat "stop building" stand of the resolution may be even stronger than some of the residents wanted. "I don't think it is feasible to just discontinue the road now." he said. "But we have placed the residents in a better situation to negotiate with the Highway Depart- ment. Things like sound barriers. depressing parts of the road and elimination of at least one of the proposed in- terchanges are the things they told me they wanted." He said the council has to vote on street access and egress routes," Tedesco said, "We don't want to be un- reasonable and I'm sure the department doesn't want al- leys running into their road." Highway department officials have indicated that they will have to go to the council at least five more times for contract and plan approvals on what remains of the project. The officials also say, like poker players keeping their hole card covered. that if the council does not ap- prove their plans. federal and state law provide the means for continuing the work without approval. ELEVATED 22 to 25 feet above the grade of present Pleasant Avenue, 35 E will be level with the foundation of the old playhouse in the sloping backyard of Mrs. Karen Avaloz's home, 330 Irvine Ave., the street that runs along the hill behind Chil- —sOW Parr*. dren's Hospital, below Summit Avenue. Mrs. Avalon stands in her hillside backyard. When the proposed freeway is built, it will carry cars directly behind and at nearly the same level as the playhouse. Neighborhood Members Make Up 35E Action Group Three members each from four neighborhood organizations make up the RIP 35 E action commit- tee. Chairman of the com. mittee is James Wengler, 78.3 Fairmount Ave., of the Summit Hill Associa. tion, who will make the presentation at a meeting with highway and city of- ficials Wednesday. The other members from Summit Hill are Stuart W. Wells I11, 521 Grand Hill and Mrs. H. B. Hewitt, 25 Ken wood Pkwy. Representatives f r am the West Seventh Street Associahen are the Rev. Alfreti Skluzacek, presi- dent .n the Association and pastor of St. Stanis- laus parish: Mrs. Kathy Vadnais. 233 Banfils St.. The Ramsey Hill Asso- elation members are Mrs. Nancy Mairs. 5 Heather Place; Mrs. Karen Ava- loz, 330 Irvine Ave., and Thomond O'Brien, 480 Grand Ave. South Lexington Area will bz represented by Mrs. Henry L. Taylor, 665 S. Lexington Ave.; Mrs. Charles Coe, 1384 Alaska Ave,.and Mrs. Earl Strickland, 564 Montcalm Place. and Lee Houske, 336 S. Osceola Ave. The RIP committee will meet with city and state officials and representa- tives of civic groups at 7:30 p.m. Wednesday at the University Club. ROCK blasted from route of 35-E near West Seventh 5t. is piled 25 feet high at Harrison and Western, near planned Grand interchange, where Thomond R. O'Brien, 480 Grand Hill, a RIP activist, surveys it. He noted that EYEBALL to eyeball encounters with —'err Photo truck and automobile drivers is what Mrs. 5t., one block west, will be the width of a Dale Hansen, 335 Bay 5t., anticipates when driveway from her home. Backyard equip- 35 E is completed. The freeway runs about men}, including barbecue, has been moved 80 feet from her kitchen window. A to a space between two small buildings at U-shaped service road from Bay to View the rear of the lot. —suer Photo this is about the height the interchange planned for Grand -Ramsey will be. The freeway will be built over Grand Avenue. Unity Key in I-35E Protest By KATHRYN BOARDMAN Staff Writer "RIP 35E" stands for Residents in Protest against an extension of the freeway from the west edge of the Loop south- west to the Lexington Ay- enue bridge. RIP expresses exactly what some of the protes- tors on Irvine avenue (back of Children's Hospi- tal) to Middleton avenue off S. Lexington want done with that 3.5 miles of highway. RIP could mean Rest In Peace, the hope of many for the freeway now under construction and the State Highway Department which is responsible for it. RIP is a phenomenon 1n the protest field. It spread rapidly through four neighborhood groups and the residents of the four areas — some on the high bluffs of The Hill and oth- ers on the plateau below that 1s part of the Missis- sippi River valley — unit- ed in opposition to the freeway. The new organization answers the question: "Why did these people wait until this late date to rise up and roar against this freeway?" They didn't! As individ- uals, single family house- holders and taxpayers, they have been register- WENGLER ing disapproval to the city and the highway depart- ment for the last 12 to 15 years. But they protested singly. The difference now is that they have banded to- gether. They feel they have some muscle. Tehy are prepared with facts and figures and their own goals for the kinddof city and neighborhood they wish to live in when they lace Highway Department officials and engineers. WHAT brought about this change? Robert L. Fry. 641 S. Lexington Pkwy., whose home over- looks the freeway path, says, "We've learned in the past few years that protest is effective. The young people have taught us something. We've also learned a lot more about the necessity to preserve our land and our cities in a liveable condition." T h e development of neighborhood community organizations in recent years has given residents a base from which to voice their views. Three established groups and another in the organiza- tional process became MRS. MAIRS fired up at about the same time when they saw the actual turned earth for the freeway in the area southwest of Duke street (Holm and Olson green- house) angling to the new Shortline railroad bridge near Jefferson. Then they saw and heard the huge earth moving machines tearing up the land. It was a 25-foot high pile of rock stacked at a point near Western and Harri- son (near the foot of Ram- sey Hill) that shocked some residents. Others saw what an abundance of exits and entrances. full diamond interchanges and modifled inter- changes, were going to do to their residential neigh- borhoods. SOME FOUND out —as in the West Seventh Street area near the Palace playgrounds — that they were to be bounded by four heavy traffic streets or that their quiet streets will be "collectors" for freeway traffic. Others heard the noise of the construction trucks and began to wonder what traffic on the completed freeway would sound like in summer when the win- dowsareopen —what their backyards and gar- dens will be like as a re- sult of both noise and air pollution. Suddenly the Highway Department was getting queries from members of the associations. Word spread front one research- er to another that other neighborhoods were un- happy. The idea of putting up strong opposition spread from the West Seventh Street Association (a Neighborhood Develop- ment Program group) to the Summit Hill Associa- tion and the Ramsey Hill Association. The latter two are neighborhood de- velopment and preserva- tion groups. And then South Lexington Avenue residents got the news. took heart and, under the leadership of Mrs. Henry Taylor, 655 S. Lexington, are forming a neighbor- hood group. RIP is the brain child of James Wengler, 783 Fair- mount Ave., an architect, who won quidk support from the associations and his friends and neighbors including Mrs. Nancy Matra. 5 Heather Place, who helped organize the April pre -election protest to the City Council. The Summit Hill Rip- pers were quickly joined by Mrs. Walter W. Pesi. na, 381 View St., and the Rev. Alfred Skluzacek, 398 Superior St., of the West Seventh Street Associa- tion. Mrs. Karen Avaloz 330 Irvine Ave.. and James Lynden, 435 Port- land, fell in from Ramsey Hill Association, Thomond O'Brien, 480 Grand Hill gives double support as a member of both Hill groups. Then along came Mrs. Taylor from S. Lex- ington. These Rip people repre- Turn to Page 15, Col. 1 A. 3 - 24 Live Presence of Road Aroused Ire Continued From Page 14 sent hundreds of other res- idents. In fact, they repre- sent people who never heard of the neighborhood groups until the donny- brook over the freeway started, One woman said that one morning about three weeks ago she was driv- ing down Pleasant Avenue and noticed the house steps flanked by stone pil- lars, lilac bushes behind them, that led only to cleared land reserved on the north side of Pleasant near Children's Hospital for the six -lane freeway. It turned her on to RIP. THE FREEWAY that nobody ever really be- lieved would be - built along Pleasant Avenue and out across the hill down to the river sudden- ly became a live presence in the whole area. And the oppositon to the six -lanes of traffic which almost everyone agrees will cut the West Seventh Street Area off completely from Summit -Hill (in the large sense of the old Hill) has brought the two sec- tions of the city together. Highway engineers have said that This is a natural path for the freeway be- cause it does not divide a neighborhood. That's how much they know about it, according to Louis Pitney owner of the Pitney Food Market, 1032 W. 7th St., one of the few markets that still delivers the daily grocery and meat order. "Most of our customers are up on the Hill," he said. "They come down here all the time." Shooting down Osceola Ave. to West Seventh is an experience every Hill housewife knows well be- cause the West Seventh Street area is whore she finds the expert cabinet maker, the upholsterer, the carpenter who will re- pair a trellis or build a tri- ple garage and countless other craftsmen. MRS. KAREN Asaloz, 330 Irvine Ave., says the freeway will be a physical barrier to the West Sev- enth Street area. Others say it will be a psychologi- cal barrier to driving downtown from, say, the 700's on Goodrich Avenue. Mrs. Avaloz at this point is quite concerned about how she will get out of her Irvine Avenue home at the east end of the street since 110 provision seems to have been made for this. It opens to Pleasant nov. Smouldering rages about acquisition of the Highway Department's right of way are burning bright. A home on Bay Street was "taken" 12 years ago and demolish- ed. The occupants at that time were given 90 days to find another place to live, according to Mrs. Dale Hansen, 335 Bay St. The lot has stood vacant ever since. But there 's activity there now. The freeway is being built almost at FATHER Al. ground level about 100 feet from the side of Mrs. Hansen's three -bedroom home. In fact she can look out her kitchen window into the eyes of drivers of highway trucks backing and iiifing in the wide path that will be the new freeway. A service road will con- nect what would other- wise lie the dead end of Bay Street at the freeway with View Street. It will be a short loop there. This service road will be built near the property line of the Hansen home — about the width of a one -car driveway from the house. BOTH MRS. Hansen and her husband have been concerned for months about the proximity of their backyard to the ser- vice read and the free- way. There will be no fence along the •service road. The 'loosens may put one up ithere was one there but it was taken down when the house on the next lot was acquired) hul they were told they could put one up if they wished. "They said if any ear ran into it it would be our loss," htrs. Hansen said. Now she's worried about cars running into her backyard from the ser- vice road, She is also con- cerned about the noise and vibrations from the freeway. The Hanse ns have owned their home for about five years- When they moved there the house next door was standing. One beyond that had been removed for road development. "That was 12 years ear- lier and nobody thought g more tsouid come of the freeway plan." she said. "A year ago we got a $3.000 loan under the Neighborhood Development Program frmn LIRA to bring the house up to code." Airs. Ilansen has a new, con- venient kitchen -- but the blasting for the freeway is cracking the plaster. In addition to the loan they invested $4,000 in improv. ing their home. F:D BANNIF. 310 S. Os- ceola Ave.. is located along the south side of the freeway excavation on S. Osceola Ave. Bonnie has long anticipated retiring and moving to an acreage in the country. He has found the acreage but he is unable to sell his house because of its proximity to the freeway. Martin Companion is on the north side of the free- way at 1646 Middleton St. The trough for the high- way is close to the back of his property. The house on Race Street. one block south which corresponds to Companion's, has the freeway running up to the dining room windows. But the stale is going to bury that house. Companion. husinesa representative of Sheet Metal Workers Local 76. has said he intends to leave the city if the free- way continues as it is at this moment. The Com- panion family has a large. pleasant backyard which they use a lot in summer but the noise. they be- lieve, will drive them in- side. Their house is one of many that was tucked in with other houses in a row but is now open to expo- sure from the highway cut. Companion says that MRS. VADNAIS the noise cram traffic on W. 7th Street is now an annoyance in his house. "THEY cut about 60 big trees out of here," he said. "The trees were beaonful and th''y provid- ed : sound barrier. No more." Middleton. a short street. was severed. On the south side of the freeway. the houses on the edge are in a sunilar situ- ation. When asked why she did not protest long ago about the freeway route, Mrs. Companion said, "We protested way back when George Va- voulis was mayor. Nobody cared. They told us this highway was progress." She did not think so then and she has not changed her mind, she said. The MRS. PESINA house is an attractive, white cla pbda rd one which was enlarged with a $10,000 addition several years ago. "I would never have put on the addition." Compan- ion said, "if I had known that the freeway was going to be this close to That's a recurring theme. Nobody under- stood the route of the free- way. When some of the bridges were built to care ry streets over it they be- gan to wonder. THESE ARE the pri- vate, close•to-home sto- ries of what the freeway has done to some people's lives. Bun whole neighbor- hoods are also feeling that pinch The eight -square - block area bounded by Jefferson. Randolph, Os- ceola and Victoria is di- rectly concerned. Jeffer- son and Randolph are heavy traffic streets now. According to the present plans. there will be off and on ramps to the freeway at Randolph, Victoria and Osceola. Streets in the vi- cinity will feed cars to the freeway and carry them away. In this area are some 2.500 children who attend the area's four elementa- ry and one junior -senior high school. The schools are not all within the eight square blocks but just out- side it and are attended by children who will have to contend with the traf- 're, according 1. Mrs. Pesina. Mrs Pesina and her husband, halter, are ac- tive community workers. In addition to the five schools involved, Palace Playground. oa Jefferson, St. Clair Playground on the edge of the freeway and Monroe Field on Vic- toria will all feel the ef- fects of the freeway traf- fic and the freeway noise. CARS MAY get onto the freeway to travel east (to- ward the Loop) on ramps on Randolph, Osceola and Victoria in this particular neighborhood. There are off ramps for west bound cars at the same in- tersections. Persons get- ting off the ramps to go south will travel under bridges. Mrs. Pesina, the mother of seven children ranging from 4 to 17 years, says that the people in her neighborhood accepted the freeway as inevitable because they did not know and were not told that there was an alternative. "This was not the only route the new freeway from the south to Down- town St. Paul could fol- low," she said. "But we were not informed of this. It was presented as the only way. We know better now. We've been getting out the information and it makes a difference." FATHER AL, as the pastor at St. Stanislaus Catholic church is known in the West Seventh Street area, is concerned about this same neighborhood. "The exits and the en• trances to the freeway cut us all up with traffic," he said. "There simply do not have to be all of these breaks in this through- way. Local traffic can get downtown on West Sev- enth St. or Shepard Road." A. 3 - 25 Freeways Needed To Loop? "If the taxpayers say they want to abandon the project and spend $20 mil- lion to build up Shepard Road, then they should be allowed to," said Donald D. Wozniak. "It's then a x p a y e rs' money. It's not the high- way department's mon- ey." Donald D. Wozniak is a St. Paul lawyer. He was hired in April to plead the case of three neighbor- hood groups which formed to fight plans for the I-35E link through the west end of St. Paul. Wozniak was instrumen- tal in getting the St. Paul City Council to approve a resolution formulated by the neighborhood groups last month. WOZNIAK That was Wozniak's first bid and he claims he has more. He said he wants to "buy time," get a moratorium on the con- struction of the interstate so that studies can be made and realistic alter- natives proposed. The Minnesota Highway Department, according to Wozniak, has been plan- ning and working with lit- tle concern for and leas contact with people who will feel the impact of six lanes of concrete. "The I.35E route basi- cally was laid out 15 years ago," he said. "Engi- neers, once they lay down a pencil line, don't want to take an eraser out." But that is exaactly what Wozniak has in mind. The entire concep- tion of the interstate link is wrong, he insists. The department has not "in any sense studied any alternative routes," he said. The former state legislator also contends the planned route knifes through neighborhoods, creates a safey hazard to residents because of the number of interchanges and ramps and will create intolerable noise levels. In return for these, there are no ofsetting benefits to his clients, according to the lawyer. "No one in St. Paul needs the freeway sys- tem to get downtown," he insists. "It only provides access for the suburbs." But West End residents must pay the price of that convenience, the lawyer argues. So put it someplace else, he says. like Shepard Road. The social costs Turn to Page 15, Col. 8 Freeway `Access To Suburb Only' Continued From Page 14 along the planned route are higher than the finan- cial costa of a new route, according to Wozniak. Wozniak acknowledges that he has few legal tools to use in his fight. It would be "extremely diffi- cult" to halt the inter- state link through the courts, he said. But the intense opposi- tion by the citizens he rep- resents, plus a growing antipathy among many metropolitan resi dents over freeways and a city council he hopes will re- tain its current stance in opposition to the plans give him hope and time. Years After Garage Goes. Road Building Is Started Patrick Donnelly, 283 will close off his access to Forbes St., lost a pie the back of the house. shaped wedge of land and when he his garage to the full-dia- ed the He said dewing he o ga- Arage protest- mond i f t e r c n e v a a because he would alarmed for Grand Ave. have no place to leave his and Pleasant. car, he was advised to Donnelly says that the "leave it on the street." It Highway Department was implied that this needed the land on which would be o.k. with the po- the garage stood for one lice, Donnelly said. of the ramps connected with the big interchange "This was siz years ago which will go above — six years I've been Grand, without a garage." Don - "They offered me $1,500 nelly said. "But I feel sor- tor the garage and land". rier for the old people who he said. "I finally got had to move out of their $2.700 from them for homes. They were given both." When the land is only a short time to find used for the highway it other houses." A. 3- 26 Interchange, Ramps Aid Traffic Flow I. Ramps at Kellogg will allow traffic moving north to exit from the freeway and permit entry to travel south. 2. Ramsey -Grand full diamond interchange. 3. Ramps at St. Clair permit exit from the free- way when traveling south and entry to travel north. 4. Victoria ramps per- mit exit from the freeway when traveling south and entry to travel north. 5. Shortline fork permits exit from freeway when. traveling north and entry when traveling south. 6. Randolph Avenue has full diamond Interchange. 7. W. 7th Street has full diamond Interchange. A.3-27 APPENDIX 4 STATEMENTS AND/OR RESOLUTIONS BY CITY OF SAINT PAUL ORGANIZATIONS REGARDING PROPOSED I-35E 1. ASSOCIATION OF COMMERCIAL CLUBS, INC. 2. GRAND AVENUE BUSINESS ASSOCIATION 3. SAINT PAUL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 4. SAINT PAUL CIVIC CENTER 5. SAINT PAUL TRADES AND LABOR ASSEMBLY (AFL- CIO) A. 4-2 A. 4-2 A. 4- 3 A. 4-4 A. 4- 5 A.4-1 NM IIIN =I NMI MIN MI M Put Presidents —A. J. Fandel, E. A. Knutson, J. C. Bernhard, Forrest Tester, John Kalland, L. A. Sullivan, Bruce Dolby, Gordon Fenner. Norman Horton, Sr., Carl Jensen, Lou Midler, Russell Klein, Michael Dort, Wallace Peters and Warren Nagel ASSOCIATION OF COMMERCIAL CLUBS, Inc. „2lnttad action fat a 6ettae ;.t tPOOL" SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA FRANK SCHNEIDER, JR. DR. WM. CHOPP President Vtee President FEBRUAHY 26, 1973 To Whom it mey Concerns VERN W. MARTIN, Secretary 1856 Marshall (55104) 645-7191 The Association of Commercial C11kbs, Inc. of St.Paul have gone on tecord supporting the present and existing plans of Minnesota State Highway 35E as routed throu-r: the city. Any change of said route would mean several millions of dollars extra money. We ask that immediate steps be taken to complete 352 this year for the best interests of the city of St.Paul. COMO COMMERCIAL CLUB NORTH END BUSINESSMEN RIVERVIEW IMPROVEMENT HAZEL PARK COMMERCIAL CLUB Re ectfully submitted, Vern WA Martin, secretary Association of Commercial Cluhs,Inc. GRAND AVE. BUSINESS ASSN. EAST 7th BUSINESSMEN HIGHLAND BUSINESS ASSN. CAPITOL CITY COM'L CLUB NORTH END IMPROVEMENT CLUB SNELLING AVENUE COM'L CLUB WEST SEVENTH BUSINESSMEN RICE STREET MERCH. & PROF. CENTRAL ST. PAUL COM'L CLUB GRAND AVENUE BUSINESS ASSOCIATION 727 GRANO AVENUE Operation '85 Saint Paul, Minnesota Gentlemen: TELEPHONE 226-1586 SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55105 February 23, 1973 At a regular quarterly meeting of the Grand Avenue Business Association held May 10, 1972 a resolution was unanimously adopted calling for the com- pletion of I35E from West 7th Street to the Capital Approach area as orig- inally designed and as quickly as possible. Since that time many alternate routes have been suggested. All of these routes seem to have a few common characteristics. They either cost more, provide less, or both. The economic development of the downtown, West 7th and Grand Avenue business areas is being stifled by poor access from the southern area. For over ten years property has been bought and sold with the understanding that the freeway would be built as currently planned. To materially alter the route at this time would not be appropriate under these circumstances. It is not our position to oppose small changes such as walls, trees and street level changes as long as they do not interfere with the Grand Avenue interchange. Before any changes are allowed in the other ramps between Grand Avenue and 7th Street we feel wishes of the residents of the entire area to be served by these ramps should be taken into account. Our freeway system is not and was not intended to be designed for just those living next to it, but must satisfy the needs of the entire community, state and nation. Not only does the interstate system serve the economic needs of the country but has made leisure travel much easier and faster. We are behind many states in our freeway construction. We do not feel more barricades should be put in the path of their rapid completion. REM:lsd Sincerely yours, ;4..1, Raymond E. Meyer President STATEMENT OP ERV A. TIMM, ECONOMIC GROUP MANAGER, AT OPERATION 85 MEETING, FEBRUARY 26, 1973, RELATIVE TO THE POSITION OF THE SAINT PAUL AREA CIHAMBER OF COMMERCE ON I-35-E ACTIVITIES. BROAD BASED POLICY The Saint Paul Area Chamber of Commerce has a very broad -based and long- standing policy relative to I-35-E. Its position has called for "the completion of I-35-E as expeditiously as possible" in recognition that the highway grid system, as proposed by the Minnesota Highway Department and the Metropolitan Council, will not function as designed until all of it is constructed. The freeway benefits will be minimal until the entire I-35-E Corridor is completed linking Saint Paul with Dakota County and points in southern Minnesota and beyond. There have been many "I-35-E problems". The major areas of concern are currently in the Saint Paul. corridor and the "big interchange" (I-35-E, I-494 and T.H. 55). PRESENT POLICY . The Saint Paul Chamber of Commerce modified its policy somewhat on May 30, ▪ 1972, to address itself specifically to problems that developed in the W Saint Paul corridor. Its position is basically "the Chamber recommends that the City Council, Highway Departrent and affected citizens meet at an early date to find a compatible solution to design questions, so that work may be expedited to complete I-35-E in the present corridor in Saint Paul." SUBMITTED TO HIIGHWAY DEPARTMENT The Chamber set forth its position in a letter to Commissioner Ray Lappegaard, Minnesota highway Department, on July 21, 1972, which con- firmed various discussions with committee members and which included five specific proposals to be evaluated. In that letter it urged that the Highway Department "exhibit reasonable flexibility in all areas of concern except those involving realignment outside the proposed corridor." It also requested a public hearing and presentation on the I-35-E problem. ImPLEMENTATICN OF POLICY In the further implementation of the sense of the r arher's resolution, it formed an I-35-E ad hoc committee under the Chairm.:n.n^' p of Frank D. Marzitelli to work with interested croups it resolving design rrel:lens. Among groups that it met mitt were the Northern Palota Joint ;ig'_n'af .tudy Committee, Ramsey County I:ospital and Sanatorium Commi7.iion, Dakota County Development Association, RIP 3°7, etc. The Charter's Public Transportation Committee heard a presentation by the '.?alter Antler Company on November 2°, 1972, setting forth the sir_ alternative proposals that it was studying. At that meeting, the rharer stated its official position as being most closely identified with alternate three build I-35-E in the present corridor with design modifi- cations. ECONOMIC CONCERNS More recently, the Chamber has become concerned that the economic impact of the various alternative proposals might not be receiving due consider- ation. we were, therefore, pleased to learn that the Walter Butler Company had been retained jointly by the Minnesota Highway Department and the City of Saint Paul for the in-depth economic study which is now in process. REASSESSMENT At this juncture, the Chamber finds itself still in complete support of its long-established. policy to "expedite the completion of I-35-E" and substantially in support of alternate three, canine for the completion of I-35-E along the proposed alignment in Saint Paul with design modifi- cations, such as changes in trade and/or ramp corrections and the possi- bility of covering the freeway in certain areas so as to reduce noise impact. It would seem, however, that we must await the development of specific design plans by the Highway Department before the Chamber can react to, or support, the alternative proposals, since we just don't know what impact they will have on traffic destined to the central business district, Civic Center, etc. NMI OM IMO NMI December 18, 1972 pST. CIVIC CENTER Walter Butler Company 175 Aurora Avenue Saint Paul, Minnesota 55103 Attention: Tuncay M. Aydinalp Gentlemen: We are enclosing herewith copy of Civic Center Authority Resolution #584 dated December 14, 1972, which involves your organization in the Civic Center Authority's deep concern over future traffic conjestion in the Civic Center area. Even though there may be a long delay in resolving I-35E, we feel that every effort should be made now to relieve traffic problems in the immediate area. Yours very truly, Reuel D. Harmon, Chairman Civic Center Authority Enclosure JOHN E. FRIEDMANN, MANAGING DIRECTOR 143 WEST FOURTH STREET, SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55102E (612) 224.7361 Reuel D. Harmon Chairman Lloyd L. Leiden Vice Chairman CIVIC CENTER AUTHORITY Frank S. Farrell Daniel M. Gephart Frank C. Judd Dean Meredith Cyril P. Pesek Richard C. Redman, Jr. Victor J. Tedesco cc.-. WHEREAS, the Civic Cenzer .: r ty anticipates E .. opening of its new facilities 0:. January 1, 1S73; WHEREAS, its t act' ns ic:. te:: rho rav audiences from many communitiesattractions is the metropolitan area; and WHEREAS, the present controversy regarding "-35E has yet to be resolved and, along with it, the final traffic pattern for ingress and egress to the Civic Ce:.ter; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Civic Center Authority ce..a.:unicatc., its concern over the great possibilities of traffic congestion and resulting repercussions in future patronage for the Civic Center due to a lack of adequate traffic highways to serve the Center and wishes its concern and its strong disapprova- of any delay in plans to relieve the traffic congestion aced to the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, the Chamber of Commerce, the Mayor and City Council, Walter Butler Company, Project 85 and the Minnesota State Highway Department; ant be is FURTHER RESOLVED,. That the Civic Center Authority urges these parties to seek a quick and speedy resolution of the matter. Nays 7 Irrc l ] Budd rteider Wesel.: �l�%1di�L:ln� 'Tedesco Harmon In Favor: App: ovcd_ / _a Against. \ �;, n ri nin SAINT PAUL Jraced anf c ator—t36embl y LABOR TEMPLE, 418 AUDITORIUM STREET, SAINT PAUL, MI NNESOTA 55102 • PHONE 222-3787 F117.1. •.gar.. , 1573 40.4 Operation 85 Robert Van Fioef 538 Midwest Euiidi:`.c St. Paul, Minn. 551Ci Dear Bob: On January 24, 1973, the St. Paul Trades and ta`,i r,sser.:.ly aopr.>v-ri the following report from our Civic .:;or:mittea. CIVIC COMMITTEE "DelegateJBilder, Chairman, reported on ch •:r study of the completion of Highway 35-E stating that tey had held three lengthy hearings wit`: Loth proponents and opponents. He felt the committee had discussed ail te pros and cons and listed the following points as naving an effect on their recommendation. 1. There is $29,000,000 available for completion as planned and none for alternate routes. 2. The effect on the new Civic Center, if not completed. 3. Noise problems can very well be eliminated. 4. We need this new improved entrance to St.Paul. 5. Many petitions were received to complete the Highway. The Committee recommends that the Assembly favor completion of Highway 35-E as planned unless an environmental impact survey favors another plan, and that we notify the City Council of our support for completion. Tt was M./S/c to concur in the recommendation. 8eport approved." Cordially, A. J. Tony DeZiei Fusiness .ieoresentative opeiutc#i2 APPENDIX 5 STATEMENTS AND/OR RESOLUTIONS BY DAKOTA COUNTY PUBLIC BODIES REGARDING PROPOSED I- 35E 1. DAKOTA COUNTY 2. VILLAGE OF APPLE VALLEY 3. VILLAGE OF BURNSVILLE 4. VILLAGE OF EAGAN 5. VILLAGE OF INVER GROVE HEIGHTS 6. VILLAGE OF LAKEVILLE 7. VILLAGE OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 8. CITY OF WEST SAINT PAUL 9. INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO, 199 (INVER GROVE HEIGHTS) A. 5-2 - A. 5-4 A. 5-5 A. 5-6 - A. 5-7 A. 5-8 - A. 5-10 A. 5- 1 1 A. 5-12 A. 5-13 - A. 5-14 A.5-15 A. 5- 16 Note: The Consultant has not included any statements from the private sector in Dakota County in Appendix 5 because the number of statements received were too few to be considered as a representative sample of prevailing sentiment. A.5-1 pm mg In mot ma INN — in NM um tam 11.11 we am NM or. mom ams.4 DAKOTA COUNTY *COURT HOUSE • HASTINGS. MINNESOTA 55033 312 VERMILLION S TOASTING 6. MINNESOTA 55033 ONE 612.E37.3ISI EVE 2Y Walter Butler Engineering Co. 175 Aurora Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55103 RE: F.A.I. 35E Gentlemen: February 20, 1973 The County of Dakota and the communities of Mendota Heights, Eagan, Burnsville, Apple Valley, Lakeville, Rosemount, Inver Grove Heights, South St. Paul, and West St. Paul are deeply concerned over the proposal of the R.I.P. 35E Group to realign or reroute F.A.I. 35E in Dakota County. The Group's proposal has already caused an unfortunate delay to completion of certain segments of the interstate system, and has encouraged other people in Dakota County to seek additional delay or rerouting of other needed highway improvements. But, the most serious result of any change in the interstate route in Dakota County would be the regressive effect on community and neighborhood planning for industrial, commercial and residential development. Furthermore, county and local transportation and open space planning have proceeded over the period of a dozen or more years with the given assumption that F.A.I. 35E would be constructed within the corridor originally approved from F.A.I. 35 in Burnsville to the Lexington Avenue Bridge. This assumption has encouraged the County and its communities to not only plan for orderly and efficient development, but has required very large expenditures for capital improvements by all of the communities as well as by the County. Most of the communities have bonded themselves for these improvements and it is imperative that projected development be allowed to proceed according to plan so that revenue will be earned to pay off these bonds. These expenditures include many miles of street and highway construction; installation of miles of water mains, sanitary sewer and storm sewer including necessary wells for water supply; miles of new electric transmission and distribution lines, telephone cable and conduit; gas mains and distribution lines have also been installed. Walter Butler Engineering Co. February 20, 1973 Page - 2 Thousands of acres of land have been purchased or dedicated for open space or recreational use. The sites were selected primarily for their individual merits; however, the second most important requirement for site selection is proximity to good transportation. The planned location for F.A.I. 35E and the supporting system of state, county and local streets have been a given assumption for many years, and were an important factor in site selection. Private investment in commercial, industrial and residential development will greatly exceed public expenditures. The decision to make this investment considered land access as its principal prerequisite, and it is a fact of record that the areas of most rapid development are those served by the interstate system or its planned construction. The impact on the ecology and its environment are also a matter of great concern to Dakota County and its communities. The County is aware that the impact on the natural ecology and environment must be evaluated in terms of human benefits, measured against the adverse effects of population expansion. The adverse effects must be kept to a minimum, or when not possible, find a substitution for the loss of natural space or specie. Many of today's ecologists place considerable emphasis on preserving nature in its wild state. An often neglected area is the ecology of urban environment. This delicate fabric is woven from the interrelationships of people living in neighborhood groups with various levels of religious, recreation, educational, and commercial experiences. Unlike many areas that have reached a level of development maturity without the benefit of comprehensive planning and prior to the advent of our freeway -oriented society, most of the neighborhood units in Dakota County's communities have developed within the framework created by the interstate system and its system of support roadways. Any major realignment of either Interstate 35E, 494, or Trunk Highway 3 will affect this entire road network. In addition to those neighborhood areas which would be expanded, contracted, or severed by alignment changes, many areas would be affected by changes to the service level on streets and roads in the community. In some cases, roads may have been "over built", and in many other cases, serious traffic overloads could be expected on segments of the county and local systems. Walter Butler Engineering Co. February 20, 1973 Page - 3 EFFECT OF DELAY OF COMPLETION OF INTERSTATE F.A.I. 35E More than 12 years have passed since the F.A.I. 35E route location was first presented by the State of Minnesota to the County and local communities. Many meetings hove been held to jointly discuss the merits of the route location and provide for land access to the communities. The route location of F.A.I. 35E has remained very close to the alignment originally proposed, access to land along the route was approved and in agreement with Federal, State and Local requirements. Planning for County, community and neighborhood development proceeded on a compre- hensive but detailed scale. Public utilities and private developers also made their decisions, based upon the approved location and access which was to be provided by F.A.I. 35E. Commercial centers of neighborhood and regional level have been built or planned along the construction or approved interstate location. Many committments of construction have been made on this basic assumption. A chained reaction of huge proportions of neighborhood up- heaval, bankrupt private enterprise with the attendant empty buildings, loss of tax base, etc. would occur if F.A.I. 35E is relocated as drastically proposed by the R.I.P. 35E Group. A site for a state zoo and horticultural garden has been selected on the basis of F.A.I. 35E furnishing major access to the zoo. Dakota County has authorized the expenditure of over $1,000,000.00 for site acquisition, while development plans will require an additional $23,700,000.00 expenditure by the State of Minnesota. The Zoo Board has set July, 1976 for opening date and full operation by 1977. This schedule does not allow for any delays in construction of F.A.I . 35E. The Village of Eagan has spent about $14,800,000.00 for their street system and public utilities in response to land use planning and capital improvements which were based on the assumption that F.A.I. 35E would soon be an inplace facility. While Eagan Village has experienced the greatest impact of any of the communities due to the proposed 35E interstate construction, all of the villages and cities hove bonded themselves for similar public works as a part or result of the planning process which assumed F.A.I. 35E would be constructed where the route alignment was approved by all the governmental bodies. The enormity of this committment must be evaluated in ratio to the existing small population which will be required to pay off the bonded indebtedness if development activity does not occur where the Walter Butler Engineering Co. February 20, 1973 Page - 4 EFFECT OF DELAY OF COMPLETION OF INTERSTATE I'.G,.1. 35E: (Continued) capital improvement investment hos been made. Repayment of that debt cannot be delayed until the demand for developrre nt land catches up to the time lost if F.A .I. 35E is rerouted. It is too late to reverse the committments that hove already been made by the County, the communities, the public utilities, the private sector and private individuals. The building of new communities has proceeded on the basis of comprehensive planning that assumed F.A.I. 35E would be constructed on the alignment that had been given Federal, State, County and Local approval. EXPENDITURES: Dakota County has spent $3,593,784.00 over the last 10 years to reconstruct existing county roads or dedicate and construct new county roads which lead to points of access to planned F.A.I. 35E. Holland -Jensen Lake Park, comprising 650 acres, was acquired at an expenditure of about $750,000.00 to date; 130 additional acres are planned for future acquisition at an estimated cost of $320,000.00. The location of this park in relationship to F.A.I. 35E is quite important. The site chosen is near enough to the freeway interchange so as to make this large recreation area available to many persons and yet far enough from the road to insure preservation of its wilderness character. Any alignment change for this portion of F.A.I. 35E will have a detrimental affect either to the utilization of the park or to its character and development. Total expenditures by Dakota County which were influenced by F.A.I. 35E routing amount to $5,343,764.00. A bridge has already been built on F.A.I. 35E in Mendota Heights to provide continuity for Marie Avenue and plans are now underway to construct that part of Marie Avenue in Mendota Heights which will use this bridge. Most of the communities along the F.A.I. 35E route have begun similar construction of their collector street system to supplement the State and County System. Several communities have installed utility crossings of planned F.A.I. 35E, and have designed their water system, sanitary sewer, storm sewer and utility mains and distributors as controlled by these crossings. Trunk sewers to regional disposal treatment plants were MI 1111111 N- 1 MI MI M Ili v s 1M v Mill MB Mt INS IIIIII SIM AEI NM IMF MI' MP r MI Walter Butler Engineering Co. February 20, 1973 Page - 5 EXPENDITURES: (Continued} also located and designed in accordance with the community and regional plans which in turn assumed F.A .1. 35E as a given location. Three schools have been located and constructed, so as to be a satisfactory distance From F.A.I. 35E. Community park lands have been acquired near F.A.I. 35E, yet far enough away to maintain their solitude. The suggested alternate route would actually divide Thompson- Kaposia to a greater degree by requiring at least two or four additional lanes for 35E traffic Three golf courses are located along the planned location of F.A.I. 35E. Proximity to a fast transportation route for this type of recreational activity is desireable. Most of the terrain along the route of F.A.I. 35E, as well as the land along the suggested alternate route, was formed by terminal morain of recent glacial action. It is almost impossible to locate a facility of interstate standards without serious impact on the natural environment and its ecology. However, the approved route for F.A.I. 35E does cross thru much more open land than the suggested alternate route which is heavily wooded and is dotted with numerous ponds and small lakes formed by glacial ice blocks. See Exhibit "C" for location of Parks and other open space. THE PRIVATE SECTOR: Fast, safe and efficient access to land is one of the most important determinants for selection of any site for commercial and industrial development. Residential neighborhoods also require reasonable access to high level surface transportation. Dakota County has been one of the leaders in rate of growth in the metropolitan area over the past 10 or more years, and most of this growth and expenditure has been committed on the basis of F.A.I. 35E being constructed on the route that has been approved for most of those years. Public utility companies project and respond to development activity. Most of the transmission facilities are located within the right of way of county roads and local streets, or on previously acquired easements of their own. Since the road and street systems were Walter Butler Engineering Co. February 20, 1973 Page - 6 THE PRIVATE SECTOR: (Continued/ located to supplement the interstate system or furnish service to points of access on the interstate, it would be prohibitive to relocate these utilities on either a financial or environmental impact basis. The urgency for completion of this freeway increases daily. Each day of delay forces the vehicle user and residents of Dakota County, as well as St. Paul, to suffer inconvenience of I;me delays and pollution caused by congestion of traffic on sub -standard streets. Property damage, bodily injury, and fatalities will also be greatly reduced as soon as the freeway system can replace the local streets to carry the large number of people who are dependent on surface transportation to reach their destinations. There is no question of the fact that construction of F .A .1. 35E will affect certain neighborhoods in St. Paul and Dakota County. However, over 70% of the route change suggested by R.I.P. 35E would occur in Dakota County, and will add 38% more freeway mileage within the County. Much of Dakota County was developed after the alignment of F.A.I. 35E was established. This alignment was determined after many years of study and evaluation by the planning and engineering staffs of the Minnesota Highway Department and the Metropolitan Council. Additional study will only raise the same objections in other areas to which the R.I.P. 35E Group has taken objection to. Therefore, the County strongly protests any change of alignment in Dakota County, and urge the prompt commencement of construction of F.A.I. 35E. Yours very ( J. E. Gabiou County Hwy. Engineer J E G/vk VLL3E OF APPLE VALLEY RESOLUTION NO. 1973-9 A RESOLUTION PERTAINING TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF HIGHWAY 35E IN DAYOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA. WHEREAS, a group known as the R.I.P. 35E Group proposes that F.A.I. 35E be rerouted in Dakota County over C.S.A.H. 30 to new Trunk Highway 3, and theh northerly on new Trunk Highway 3 over the Lafayette Street bridge to F.A.I. 94, and and WHEREAS, none of said rerouting proposal lies in the Village of Apple Valley, WHEREAS, the proposed rerouting as herein before referenced in other areas of Dakota County can be expected to cause additional delays in the construction of F.A.I. 35E, and WHEREAS, many communities have programmed their growth, road systems, u-" '-'e etc., to coincide with the existing routing and timing schedule of F.A.I. 35E. BE IT, THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Village Council of the Village of Apple Valley, Dakota County, Minnesota, that the Village of Apple Valley stands opposed to any further modification in the alignment of F.A.I. 35E in Dakota County for the following reasons: 1. The proposed rerouting would cause an additional three to four years' delay in the completion of said road; would cause a reduction in the anticipated assessed valuation growth of Apple Valley by 30 percent annually. 2. The route proposed by R.I.P. 35E Group would make access to the Twin Cities International Airport and other areas of Minneapolis more difficult for the residents of the Village of Apple Valley. 3. Interstate 35E is the first programmed relief to the existing Ccdar Avenue bridge bottleneck, however, its scheduled opening has been continually pushed back. Time 1s critical. Further delays will further affect the economic viability of Apple Valley andthe adjoining area which is programmed for continued growth. 4. Completion of F.A.I. 35E is critical to the proposed Minnesota Zoological Gardens to be located in the Village of Apple Valley and if bonding authority is granted to the Minnesota Zoological Zoo Board in 1973, the fizz: phase of the new Zoological Garden would be opened between July 1976 and early 1977. Total visitation is projected at two million persons annually with a substantial percentage expected from the St. Paul area. It is imperative that the Interstate 35E opening coincide with the opening of the Zoo. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Council recognizes that the R.I.?. 35E proposal does not affect the F.A.I. 35E alignment within the corporate boundary of Apple Valley and, therefore, urge that construction of F.A.I. 35E within our boundaries be corsttuttcd in accordance with the timetable in effect prior to the existence of the R.I.?. 35E group. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that certified copies of this resolution be forwarded to the Walter Butler Company of St. Paul, the Conmissioner of State Highways, and the County Board of Commissioners. ADOPTED this loth day of January, 1973. ATTEST: Richard G. Asleson, Village Clerk Fred J. Larger., Mayor CERTIFICATE I, RICHARD G. ASLESON, Village Clerk of the Village of Apple Valley hereby certify that the above resolution is a true and correct copy of a resolution adopted by the Village Council on Januaryl0, 1973. chard G. Asleson, Village Clerk -IMINIfi =Ili NM - M M 1313 East Highway 13 • Burnsville, Minnesota 55378 January 16, 1973 Governor Wendell Anderson 130 State Capitol Building St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 RE: 5. P. 1982-13 (T.H. 35C) From Jct. of T.H. 35W to Cedar Avenue in Burnsville Dear Governor Anderson: DUPLICATE ORIGINAL Enclosed find Resolution #898 entitled 'A Resolution Support- ing a Dakota County Resolution Urging No Action Be Taken Which Would Result in a Substantial Realignment of 35E in Dakota County" as adopted by the Burnsville Village Council. Also submitted are copies of the Burnsville Comprehensive Plan, the Burnsville official Zoning Map, and the Burnsville Thoroughfare Plan. Burnsville's Comprehensive Guide Plan was initiated in 1961 and completed in 1965. The thoroughfare plan, park programs, school locations, zoning, etc. was predicated on the present alignment of 35E and also took into consideration the con- struction schedule that was then in force for 35E. The delays for lack of funding and for additional studies have already created some difficulties for the Village of Burnsville. Any alignment shifts or any change in destinations or terminal points for this highway will have major impact on Burnsville's planning. Vast amount of monies from both the public sector and the private sector have been expended to make improvements that were designed and predicated upon the construction of this road on this alignment. January l(.. 1.72 Governor L.-uncle!! Anderson 130 State Capitol Luildinn Fe: S. P. I':c2-13 (T.h. 35f) It would seem unreasonable to allow a few vocal persons with selfish interests to delay this project or change the align- ment of the proposed road and disrupt orderly patterns of planning, growth and development. The net result might have score ouestionakle benefit to a small minority but v.oul0 do irreparahle damage to a vast majority of the south metropoli- tan area. Very truly yours, VILLAGE OF BURNSVILLE Donald T. Sorensen /s/ Donald T. Sorensen, P.E. Director of PuLlic Works DTS:ak cc: Commissioner of highways Mr. Ray Lappeoaard Dakota County Commissioners Mr. Gerald E. h:ollenkamp Walter butler Engineering Company Mr. Walter Butler Page 1 of 2 Page 2 of 2 RESOLUTION NO. 19G A RESOLUTION SUPPORTIIIG A DAKOTA COUNTY RESCLUTION URGING NO ACTION BE TAKEI. Wh.ICF. WOULD RESULT IN A SI htTAIIT IAL REALIGIVILNT CF 35E HI DAKOTA. COUNTY. WHEREAS, the construction of 35E through the Village of Burnsville has been a part of the Village of Burnsville Comprehensive Transportation Plan since 1962, and WHEREAS extensive planning has occurred and extensive acquisition of right-of-way and construction of Village streets has taken place making provisions for 35E, and WHEREAS the Village of Burnsville did, on August 19, 19G'.', June 21, 1971, and October 1E, 1971, adopt resolutions approving plans and specifications for 35E through the tillage of Burnsville and WHEREAS on April 3, 1972 the Village of Lurnsville adopted a resolution requesting the Minnesota Highway Department to take certain actions to include the construction of the necessary crossings of 35E and Highway 36 by the Burnsville Crosstown, and WHEREAS the Village of Burnsville has read and concurs with the resolution adopted August 22, 1972 by the Dakota County Board of Commissioners relative to 35E construction, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY the Village Council of the Village of Burnsville that we support the Dakota County CFI resolution of August 22, 1972, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we urge the Minnesota Highway Department to take no action that would cause any substantial movement of the alignment of 35E within Dakota County, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we uroe the Minnesota Highway Department to take no action which would tend to delay the construction of 35E through Dakota County, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that copies of this resolution be sent to the Governor, Commissioner of Highways, and other concerned public officials. Passed and duly adopted by the Village Council of the Village of Burnsville this 5th day of September 1972. ATTEST: Leslie J. Anderson /s/ Alfred E. Hall /s/ Alfred E. Hall, Mayor Leslie J. Anderson, Clerk I M MI M IMO 11111111 1E11 l MN r RIM /2o.se4I400, Rodene, 4.tde444 a 4S4ocia.ted, l.ec. 1335 *J. 1iu..b vitiy/.i ay 36 St. Pain hammedola 55113 Pitons: 636-4600 December 22, 1972 Walter Butler Engineering Co. 175 Aurora Ave. St. Paul, Minnesota 55103 Re: Relocation of I35E Eagan, Minnesota Our File No. 6049 Gentlemen: Otte G. son..eroo. P.E. Robert W. Rate,, P.S. Joseph C. Aw(eelik. P.a. Bradford A Lerohrra. Robert R F•rooard. ...hard E. Turner. P.R. lessee C. (Neon. P.E. Is rrrnrr F Eckhart.. P.F.. e:lrrnn R. Cah. l'.E h Nrh A. Gordon. P.k. Charles A. Enekeon flieka.d W. E.ter Shama* E. Nara* Robert G.Schenk. As Village Engineer for Eagan, we have been requested by the Mayor and Council to submit the enclosed statement describing some of the adverse effects on the Village of Eagan which are expected if I35E is relocated as suggested by the R.I.P. 35F. group. It is requested that all of this information be considered in the preparation of your report on the feasibility of the various routes. Every effort should be made to expedite the completion of your report and to resume the construction of I35E. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK S ASSOCIATES, INC. R obG(DrLn /. er H. Rosen RHR: mb Encl. cc: Mayor Herbert Polzin Alyce Bolke Paul Hauge Dakota County Highway Dept. Minnesota Highway Dept., Die Commissioner of Highways ‘11 MEMO TO: Walter Butler Company FROM: Village of Eagan SUBJECT: Response to R.I.P. 35E Group Proposal for Relocation of I35E. The R.I.P. 35E Group has proposed that Interstate 35E he rerouted in Dakota Co, over CSAH 30 to new T.H. 3 and northerly on the proposed Lafayette Free- way into St. Paul. The following is a summary of the expected impact on Eagan which this re-routing will create. 1. The most serious detrimental effect will be the disruption to the land use planning and zoning r •hich has heen carried out over the past 13 years since the route of 35E through Eagan was first established. During this period, all land use planning, and zoning has been made with the full expectation of I35E being constructed in the chosen corridor. over 2700 acres of Industrial land has beerso zoned in the northern portion of the Village with access and use of I35E as a major consideration. Approximately 700 acres of commercially zoned land is also present in this portion of the Village. All zoning was carried out with the I35E corridor reserved for free- way construction and remaining as agricultural zoning to minimize right-of-way acquisition costs. With the Freeway re-routed to Co. Rd. 30, much of this land will not be well suited to this industrial or commercial development. The economic loss which could result is staggering. An average loss of $10,000 per acre is conservative considering that in- dustrial land, when developed is now selling for from $20,000 to $60,000 per acre. For the industrial area alone, this represents an economic loss of $27,000,000 to the lend owners. The commercially zoned land could sustain an even higher loss per acre but at $10,000/Ac. loss, this represents another $7,000,000 in land value reduction. The effect on the tax base of the Village and County is even greater. Based upon existing development, the assessed valuation of a fully de,elopcd industrial area is in excess ot $300,000/Ac. For the 2700 acres of industrial land, this represents a tax bane at full development of ever $800,000,000. It is expected that at least half of this industrial development will not be constructed if 135E is re-routed. This would be an assessed valuation loss of over $400,000,000 to Eagan. Also, a large portion would probably be lost to Dakota County as much of the proposed re-route is not suitable for in- dustrial development. 2. Another serious impact will he the three or four year delay in com- pletion of the Freeway which will result it it is re-routed, Because Eagan and its adjoining suburbs are the most rapidly growing areas in the entire state, the traffic flow problems to and from this area are already almost in- tolerable. Interstate 35W is the only freeway serving the south side of the Page 1. Minnesota River at present and it does nothirvt for Ewan traffic. Cagan residents cost rely on the antinnatcd Cedar Ave. bridge and the Iterdota Bridge both of which are right now severely overloud,' during ,ill peak traif is flow periods. Even with an expedited 135E construction prograr, the peak period traffic problems will he almost impossible by the time it is constructed. Time delays of 30 minutes each way for an average of 15,000 cars per day re- sult in a loss of 15,000 manhonrs which, at the conservative figure of $5/hour is an economic loss of $75,000 per day to residents in this area. The yearly loss on this basis is over $18,000,000. 3. At the present tire, the United States Postal Service if constructing a regional bulk mail handling center in Eagan on Lexington Ave. and near I35E. This facility will cost in excess of $15,000,000 and will employ over 500 people. It will handle all bulk mail for a several state arca. Relocation of I35E to Co. Rd. 30 will require many of the large semi -trailer trucks to travel much farther for Freeway access. Such travel ::ill be over Village and Covoty roads not built for this heavy traffic. Such Ilse will severely strain the local road system and will require costly upgrading of these routes as well as causing traffic conjestion in the area. Convenient access to I35E was one of the major reasons for locating the Bulk Mail facility where it is. 4. The new route will make freeway access to the International Airport much less convenient and more Lime consuming. It will keep much of the north end of Eagan from convenient freeway access to the City of St. Paul. 5. The delay in freeway construction and the decrease in industrial develop- ment will adversely effect the Village utility planning and financing. Much of the trunk water and sewer system has been installed in the industrial, commercial and residentially zoned north portions of the Vil il;e. Capacity of lines has been bared upon the coning and proposed land use now present. To provide this capacity elsewhere, will he very expensive. Also, the utilities have been built with the present growth rate in grind and will have their financ- ing programs seriously impaired if delays or re-routing causes a severe drop in the number ot connections to the system and a decrease in user revenue. Connection charges and revenue are essential elements in the financim• neces- sary to meet yearly bond service charges. It is expected that the rate of development of both residential and industrial areas would drop approximately one third. 6. At the present tine, only a small portion of the Rosemount SeBoul District is severed by the tentative route of 135E. If re-routed down Co. Rd. 30, the Freeway will divide off over 8 square riles of this district from the rest of its area. Also, the proposed re-routing will pass directly in front of an existing elementary school. 7. The topography along the proposed re-routing is extremely rugged, with changes in elevation of over 100' in less than a half mile in several places. Freeway construction on this route will he considerably more disruptive to ground and tree cover than the original. route due to the topography. 8. The proposed re-routing, will wipe out a number of horses in existing developments. Because the original corridor has been planned for :<o long, very few existing homes and nu new developments are adversely effected by it. Page 2. 1111111 11111 111111 r — ON —. NM P NS Ns M NM 'a■r NIB NMI IIIIII INS all INN NM IIIIII MIN NEI 9. The major street plan of Eagan has for the past 13 years been developed around the proposed location of 135E and the existing County Road System. The proposed re-routing of I35E down County Road 30 will not only disrupt the County Highway system but will also render much of the Village major street system in the north end of the Village inadequate. The resulting need to pur- chase additional right of way and to reconstruct certain roads to a higher type will create impossible demands on the Village street funding capabilities. 10. Village planning for Park development will be adversely affected by the proposed relocation. Eagan is currently in the midst of a $1,000,000 park N acquisition and development program. They are also planning a trail system for future construction. The location of parks and trails has been predicated on the original I35E location. A change in its location will require readjust- ments in the location and development of several parks such as McCarthy Park which abuts Co. Rd. 30 and llackhawk Lake Park which was planned to be compatible with the original I35E route. New trail crossings of the Interstate would have to be located and planned. Land acquisitions currently being carried out would have to be re-evaluated. 11. Considering all aspects of the proposed relocation, there appear to be no advantages to Eagan and many very serious disadvantages. Every effort should be made to keep the original planned route and to expedite the construc- tion program to regain as much lost time as possible. Page 3. `j/ llage al T we' Czaae s'/ee9&d 8650 Courthouse 80uievard INVER GROVE HEIGHTS. MINNESOTA 55075 (612) 454-5111 �UlrinrlJJit✓%�C.�^ 2 CONCERNS OF UPDATING PROPOSED LAFAYETTE FREEWAY (TRUNK HIGHWAY 3) TO F.A.I. 35E ROUTING The effect of redesignating County Road 30 to F.A.I. 35E routing and to intersect with proposed Highway 3 (Lafayette Freeway) would be quite detrimental to the Village of Inver Grove Heights. The basis for such a statement is as follows: SOCIAL ASPECTS -- The proposed Lafayette Freeway has been con- srdered in the planning stage close to ten years. The compre- hensive guide plan that is used within the Village of Inver Grove Heights is based around the construction of Lafayette Freeway in a trunk highway capacity. Considerable planning and zoning have taken place together with open space estab- lishment, school districts, municipal facilities. Numerous residential and commercial rezonings are all inputted with the Trunk Highway 3 plan. A major change to the trunk highway plan such as redesignation of the proposed roadway to the status of a federal interstate system would greatly affect the plans with- in the Village thus far. The Village of Inver Grove Heights has considerable existing development adjacent to the proposed Trunk Highway 3 (Lafayette Freeway). Any change relating to necessary increase in right of way would definitely affect the existing developed areas that have been constructed and allowed to build in accordance with the Trunk Highway 3 proposed plan. In addition, all per- mits as they relate to development, either existing or pro- posed, have been granted with the consideration of the align- ment with and structure of the proposed Trunk Highway 3 that has been presented by the Highway Department as their proposed Trunk Highway 3 plan. Within the Village of Inver Grove Heights and along the corri- dor of Trunk Highway 3 there exists McGroarty Park. Although the present alignment of Trunk Highway 3 does sever the park, it still leaves access on either side for a development program. In addition to the existing park, the Village has undertaken the procedures to acquire a large tract of land adjacent to McGroarty Park known as the Gun Club property. This property would likewise be severed by the highway system as now proposed. However, any additional impact relating to that of the federal interstate system again would greatly affect and in some in- stances completely destroy portions of the park that have been Considered pertinent to its ultimate development. Any consid- eration for upgrading the proposed Trunk Highway 3 in this area would have a detrimental effect relating to our park system. UTILITY ASPECTS -- The Village of Inver Grove Heights has con- structed numerous sanitary sewer, waternain and storm sewer facilities in addition to ultimate design criteria for additional trunk facilities. All the design criteria and construction in- stallations dates are based en the proposed plan relating to the Trunk Highway 3 designaticn. The changing to an interstate sys- tem would greatly affect the planning and existing constructions of various utilities immensely. The construction of the existing utilities are existing and/or proposed to depths that were established based on the proposed Lafayette Freeway design. If, because of increased standards required by federal interstate design will necessitate the lowering of existing utilities and/or proposed extension of sub -trunks, the cost of such action would be extensive and dev- astating to the Village of Inver Grove Heights. Imagine, if you would, the placement of a sanitary sewer line at a depth of eight feet under a proposed elevation of freeway. Then, we find it necessary to lower the gravity sewer another three feet. This would require either an extensive renewal of the existing sewer by gravity or necessitate the installation of a lift sta- tion. In addition to the construction costs, the cost for main- taining a system while constructing a new system is economically unfeasible in most instances. INTERNAL TRANSPORTATI0N--PLANNI'1G AND CONSTRUCTION -- A major thoroughfare plan within the Vii a-1 ,e oT Inver Grove Heights has been used as a guide and numerous municipal state aid and county street systems have been implemented within the Village of Inver Grove Heights. All of these projects, existing, pro- posed and planned are utilizing the concept of the Trunk High- way 3 designation. Again, any major change for enlargement to an interstate system would greatly affect internal trans- portation patterns that have been established and/or proposed within the Village of Inver Grove Heights. The above mentioned points all carry very high social, physical and financial burdens if the federal interstate 35E would be rerouted as a proposed alternate to the present 35E alignment. The Village of Inver Greve Heights would receive severe adverse effects if in fact the F.A.I. 35E prefect would be aliowed to reroute from its present course to flow into the system as it is presently desic;ned. The Village of Inver Grove Heights is aefinitely opposed to such a rerouting as initiated by the R.I.P. 35E group; in St. Paul. - _ .7 /� / / i L Date Robert ;J. ,cr., fer Village Administrator um gni es as Ns on gm so so an so as Ns au am um Ns in win r No ter — rr r r r r rr r r it — N r I r MO • BECKMAN YODER and SEAY INC planners and landscape architects pittsburgh fort wayne saint paul December 14, 1972 TO: Ray Lappegaard, Commissioner, Minnesota Department of Highways J. E. Gabiou, Dakota County Highway Engineer Tuncay Aydinald, Walter Butler Engineering Co. FROM: Lee Starr, Village Planner, Village of Lakeville RE: Village of Lakeville Planning Commission Response R.I.P. 35E Proposal DEG i f072 vUltild�IJJlulli;iJ 'vfi-ivc The Lakeville Planning Commission has requested me to convey their response to I-35E route changes suggested by the R.I.P. 35E Group. Social Cost Implications Major social costs inherent in the R.I.P. 35E proposal which affect Lakeville include: •'Longer travel times for trips between Lakeville and the central and northeastern portions of the metropolitan area. Trip lengths over the R.I.P. 35E route between Lakeville and St. Paul would be at least five minutes longer than the same movements on the current 35E corridor. Significant social costs associated with this situation include basic circulation inefficiency and the unnecessary delays and frustrations caused by R.I.P. 35E's longer and more time consuming route. These delays are particularly undesirable for work trips and industrial traffic generated by Lakeville. ' The loss of resources previously allocated for the planning and program- ming of the currently committed 35E corridor. A large amount of human and financial resources have already been committed to the implementation of 35E in its current corridor. Because previous studies have established the validity of this corridor, it would seem socially irresponsible to expend additional money and time to consider questionable alternatives such as the R.I.P. 35E proposal. • Unreasonable delays in realizing the metropolitan transportation system. A complete metropolitan freeway system is essential to the social and economic viability of the Twin Cities area. Delays in constructing those elements of this system serving Dakota County communities have already created social costs in terms of unrealized development and access potential. 366 jackson street saint pawl minnesota 55101 612-225 3354 Village of Lakeville Planning Commission Response - R.I.P. 35E Proposal December 14, 1972 Page Two Any further delay would be intolerable and would exert considerable social cost by holding up the construction of the 35E link which is needed now, not in 1985. Cost Implications of Transportation Planning and System Disruption Basic costs related to the disruption of committed highway planning and construction by the R.I.P. 35E proposal include: Significant modification of a freeway corridor which has long functioned as an established given for state, metropolitan, county, and local highway planning and programming efforts. Highway planning activities of the Minnesota Highway Department, Metropolitan Council, Dakota County, and Dakota County's local governmental unwrs have been predicated on the current 35E corridor since at least 1968. Any major departure from this committed route would be impractical and intolerable because of the chaos it would create in terms of planning efforts required at all levels to effect transportation system modifications consistent with a new route proposal. Summary The Lakeville Planning Commission is grateful for this opportunity to comment on the impact of the R.I.P. 35E proposal on their community. The Planning Commission strongly recommends the retention of the currently committed 35E corridor and the rejection of the R.I.P. 35E alternative. LS/cs Village of 44eidota }{eights BANK BUILDING 750 SOUTH PLAZA DRIVE • MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA 55120 TELEPHONE (6121 452-1850 January 9, 1973 Mr. Walter Butler Walter Butler Engineering Company 175 Aurora Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55103 Re: I-35E Realignment Study Effects on Mendota Heights Gentlemen: These delayed comments from Mendota Heights are not a result of non —interest or indifference on the part of Mendota Heights officials as concerns the I-35E study. The late date of these comments is because we have been awaiting further word in the form of additional meetings with you and other interested parties. At a meeting held at the Southview Country Club on Wednesday, October 4, your representative indicated that further information concerning the status of your study would be made available to us in the future. I am not aware of any contact since that date and hence am getting somewhat uneasy as to the status and possible recommendations of the study. As mentioned earlier, the lack of comments from Mendota Heights since a resolution adopted by the Council on August 1 should not be read as a diminishing of our concerns. Conversely, we are vitally concerned in the total community development of Mendota Heights and surrounding environs. The relocation of I-35E from its proposed alignment is unthinkable: As you should know, our planning, our public development, our private development and our total community planning has revolved around the north —south alignment of I-35E through Mendota Heights. This planning has been going on since Walter Butler January 9, 1973 prior to 1959. In my opinion, it is absolutely unthinkable to spend the many millions of dollars planning and constructing this major thoroughfare for over fourteen years and then even give any serious thought to a complete realignment of such a facility. If the decision —making machinery in our democracy is so loose and so disorganized that such planning and investment is summarily set aside after fourteen years, then we had better reassess and reorganize our decision — making process. As has been mentioned publicly (at a public meeting in West St. Paul prior to October 4) we in Mendota Heights do have many concerns for noise pollution and the other adverse effects of freeways. We should know and we should be quite aware of such adverse effects since we have our share of freeways within our limited corporate limits. We are not adverse to spending additional monies in alleviating pollution problems but we are definitely against the apparent disorganized, haphazard, johnny—come—lately disruption to the construction of this very major public facility. What good are plans which have been accepted by governmental units over the past fourteen years if they are going to be changed after seventy—five to eighty—five percent of the facility is completed??? We kindly request the application of logic and common sense to the processing of this problem. If total realignment is to be given serious consideration, then I would suggest that the adverse financial and social effects to our community and the other involved communities be given like consideration. Our utilities, our parks, and land use patterns have been laid out virtually from day one, all centered around the current I-35E alignment. If adverse effects on present construction are to be alleviated, we must well consider the adverse financial effects of not building such a long —planned facility. What is to be done with the gashes of right—of—way between various platted subdivisions? Our parks are planned on a logical, community —wide system, not on the supposition that unused right—of—way can be used as park and open space. What about our various expensive sewer and water crossings through the present and proposed facility? Sewer and water planning would have been considerably more efficient and logical if land development had taken place prior to the planning and acquisition of I-35E right—of—way. In M V■s Mill M N— ON MN— 111111 N r: I— s r— M 111111 — N— r— —— 1— r MI 1 I In— r r Walter Butler January 9, 1973 What about our street and traffic patterns? They have been disrupted and misaligned around the I-35E right— of—way. Their pattern and efficiency could have been much greater without any I-35E barrier. In summary, one can only ask "when is a plan final?" The time to plan and haggle and make a decision is when the proposed facility is on paper, not when it is seventy—five or eighty percent complete. make corrections and improvements if there is a need but let's get on with the process of building according to publicly accepted plans. Very truly yours, LS - Orvil J. Jo4,nf Village Administrator OJJ:kmm cc: James Gabiou WHEREAS, it has come to the attention of the City of West Saint Paul that certain interests are requesting that the State Highway Department consider routing I-35E over the LaFayette- Waterloo Freeway alignment; and WHEREAS, it appears that such a consideration would involve adding additional mileage to the interstate system; would require RESOLUTION On motion of Carlson 3. To s pond any looney on such a study would be a waste of Seconded by Edmeyer taxpayer's money and would occasion an unjustifiable delay in meeting the area's traffic needs. 4. Copies of this resolution be directed to the City Council and to any and all int..rested grouts, agencies, and individuals for the purpose of requesting their support, on behalf of this City's interests, in this aforementioned matter. Adopted by the Planning Commission this 22nd day of August, 1972. upgrading the LaFayette Freeway to interstate standards which would Ayes: 10 close some of the east -west crossings of the freeway in the City Carlson Edmeyer a of West Saint Paul; would occasion an extended delay of both the Hesse • Kraft (/1 LaFayette Freeway and I-35E and would create an environmental Lantry .:ur thaler ►+ deterioration of the residential character of the eastern edge of Milligan (lf Pomerenke West Saint Paul; and Quell Spadaccini WHEREAS, for nearly ten years the planning processes and patterns of development in the City of West Saint Paul have been considered by the alignment associated with the LaFayette Freeway and its design provisions, utility layouts, traffic patterns and volumes, crossings and access and other important matters, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED SY the Planning Commission of West Saint Paul, Minnesota, that: 1. The City of West Saint Paul is absolutely and unequivocally opposed to any consideration to route I-35E over the LaFayette- Waterloo Freeway corridor; 2. Any consideration to route I-35E over said freeway corridor would be detrimental to this City for numerous social, environmental, traffic, and economic reasons; Nays: 0 Pass: 1 Frantes 111111 nil — ■r — — MI 11111 — — — 111111 — 1111111 — — 1111 A ■r ■r -- ON r V 1 S r r r E r- -- r r W !?:R Bi'TLF.R.O�. /! R CLJ VED • 8167 Cah.II Avenue East Inver Grove Heights, Minnesota 55075 \ j- K D. DAHLAGER Supennumlent W. D. EKLUNU AButent Superintendent J. M. EISBRENER Elelnenrery Director L E. MCKENEIE SeniorHVA SI Aool Ainsipl N.K. AHRENDT JuniorRO SeANO Primr,el December 14, 1972 Walter Butler Engineering Company 175 Aurora Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota Gentlemen: WHEREAS the proposal from the R.I.P. 35E Group, if adopted, would disect the school community, and WHEREAS this action would cost the school district immeasurable dollars in increased transportation of students and for all other student services, and WHEREAS the access to and from the west school of our district would be greatly impaired 71. BE IT RESOLVED that the School Board of Independent School District No. 199 hereby goes on record in opposition to the proposed change of 35E. Sincerely, INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 190 GG /John Crane Board Chairman fr SIMLEY JUNIOR - SENIOR HIGH SC HOC,— HI LLTOP ELEMENT ARV SC HOOL INVER GROVE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PINE BEND ELEMENTARY SCHOOL — SALEM HILLS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SOUTH GROVE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL APPENDIX 6 STATEMENT BY UNITED HOSPITALS, INC. REGARDING THEIR CONCERN ABOUT NOISE POLLUTION, VIBRATION, AND AIR POLLUTION FROM PROPOSED I-35E A. 6- 1 - A. 6-7 Note: Statement is in the form of correspondence from Paul S. Veneklasen & Associates, Consultants in Acoustics, Santa Monica, California and Ellerbe Architects, St. Paul, Minnesota. The firms serve as Consultants to United Hospitals, Inc. , parent body of St. Luke's and Charles T. Miller hospitals in St. Paul.. A.6-1 Ell all 1 11111 1 NS IN 81111 r 1 1 NM 11111 NMI ABBoclATn MRS P. cmuRon N Ms C. MBRBOA SWARD B. Mons AMMO W. BRAN MAW R. BRw MAT VAN OWN 11000S JAMS A. 0000 PAUL S. VENEIQ.ASEN & ASSOCIATES consultants in c4cauaHed 1711 SIXTMRBRB sTBaT SANTA MONICA. CALv0BMu 00404 n jai IWORSAA . ama7oo Ellerbe Architects 333 Sibley Street St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Attention: Mr. Alan Balhorn Gentlemen: 19 April 1973 We greatly appreciate the opportunity to discuss the threatened noise exposure problem to the hospital presented by the prospect of the extension of I-35E with officials of the Minnesota Highway Department and with representatives of Butler Engineering. It is gratifying to see a case of mutual concern and joint resolution for solution. The significance of the route extension for the St. Luke Hospital is shown in detail in our report of 14 July 1972, for airborne sound exposure only, in terms of construction modifications to reduce the predicted noise to reasonable criteria within patient rooms. The predicted noise exposures were based on current noise output from passenger vehicles and diesel trucks, and also showed how the exposure and remedial costs would be reduced if progressive reduction in vehicular noise were required by advanced legislation. We have since learned that Minnesota has indeed passed legis- lation to limit truck noise to 88 dBA at 50 ft. Our report shows the effect that this limitation will permit when enforcement assures accomplishment. In particular, it shows that a high quality double glazed window can be specified that will be adequate to the acoustical task. One of the challenging questions will be the degree of control that can be exercised or will be accepted by the state versus the degree of control responsibility which remains to be accepted by the hospital. The U. S. Department of Transportation has currently established a noise criterion for achievement in highway design which requires noise reduction to be provided so as to reduce the noise so that a level of 70 dBA is not exceeded more than 10% of time. This limit is to hold at the nearest residential boundary or hospital. This is Category B of land use. The wording of Category A is such that this existing hospital facility could be appropriate (" tracts of land in which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary significance, and serve an important public need, and where the preservation of those qualities is essential if the area is to serve its intended purpose."). If this were ruled to be the case, then the noise level must be reduced to 60 dBA. Our primary concern has been for the interior of patient rooms, but we must not ignore the appropriate uses of exterior areas. Depending on vehicle flow rate and mix of passenger vehicles versus trucks, the L10 - 70 level may be reached at a distance between 200 and 400 feet from the outer road boundary, presuming continuing level terrain and no interposed control device. When, as in the case of the hospital and many commercial and apartment buildings, the walls rise high above the level of the road bed, the arhievement of these levels of residual exterior noise becomes extremely difficult, and the DOT regulations are not clear as to the extent (physically) of responsibility. Another problem is that by using the 10% of time criterion, the DOT places no restriction on maximum noise from diesel trucks which pass less than 10% of the time. Our research shows that maximums of current individual trucks may exceed the L10 - 70 limit by as much as 15 dB, that the legal limited trucks (88 dBA at 50 ft.) will exceed the L10 - 70 about 8 dB, and that if the practical sound barrier is used to achieve the L10 - 70 limit at 100 ft., the truck noise may exceed this limit by as much as 25 dB. A corollary problem is that in a hospital our controlling criterion for noise control must be concerned with the disturbance or interruption of sleeping patients, caused by maximum intermittent noises, whether they originate externally or internally. Therefore, we must design for the maximum noises from diesel trucks. Still another problem is that the narrow passage for the highway past the hospital is oppositely bounded by a steep embankment which will surely complicate and increase the noise exposure to a degree which can be determined only in acoustical model facility. Our conference with the Butler Engineering representative lends assurance that they are well aware of these factors and give them due consideration in their planning for the state. We are pleased for the opportunity to preview their ideas, and are anxious to cooperate in finding practical solutions and relative responsibilities which will rea- sonably limit the economic impact on the present hospital and its future expectations. We welcome the consideration of enclosing or covering a substantial length of the highway where it passes the hospital. We are concerned about the interruption of the enclosure with an open space of 150 ft., because an enclosed length of 300 ft. is not sufficient. We appreciate the ventilation problem. However, the sudden burst and squelch of the sound as a vehicle leaves and re-enters the enclosures will result in a sound character which may be more disturbing than the typical slower onset and subsidence. We have pointed out that even current passenger vehicles do not present o sound source which requires unduly burdensome acoustical design. If all other vehicles could have their noise reduced to this family, all would be well. Therefore, we have urged consideration of enclosure (i.e. covering) for only the truck (more specifically, noisy vehicle) lanes. To be specific with a proposal criterion, our studies suggest that, if the highway construction can assure that the maximum intermittent noise exposure (currently from individual diesel trucks) will not exceed 70 dBA at the surface of the hospital, then reasonable and practical construction will provide required interior sound levels, and most of the hospital exterior grounds and potential roof garden or recreotion areas will be tenable. Another subject which is unfortunately much less approachable quantitatively. This is the problem of vibration transmission from (primarily) truck traffic on the road surface into the structure of the hospital, and more specifically, into the immediately adjacent surgery. The potential problems are manifold: possible interference with delicate dexterous tasks, interference with delicate instrument operation, direct and secondary noise generation in structure, furniture or utensils. Practical examples are often bizarre. The magnitude of the problem is dependent primarily on the character of the sub- strata on which the highway is laid and the hospital foundations rest. Secondarily, the precision of the road surface and its transverse joints are determinants. Butler Engineer- ing is clearly aware of the problem. Applicable quantitative data is sparse. Search for vibration tolerance for specific equipment is usually fruitless. Under the circumstances, it is risky to suggest a criterion for achievement. Nevertheless, we feel that some guidance is necessary. Therefore, we suggest the following values for the residual vibration in the floor of the surgery. These values are frankly the tactile limits for vibration sensitivity, postulating that the vibration may be transmitted directly into operating tables. 3 Criteria for Residual Vibration dB re 1 peak g Frequency in Hz 1 5 10 50 100 250 500 Vibration level -78 -70 -68 -60 -58 -48 -20 The achievement of these criteria, or other demonstrably satisfactory values, presents a difficult design task, probably with large economic impact. The solution may conceivably be achieved in the design of the rood bed. Alternately, to provide solution in the present hospital facilities is awesome. If the main structure will tolerate higher values, then floor vibration can be greatly attenuated using floating floor design which is standard in our group for TV and recording studios; but this measure in the existing operating rooms would be problematic, Unfortunately, we cannot chart solution to this problem. But it is important that we stress herein the existence and importance of the problem, which must clearly be faced and attacked quantitatively if the highway proceeds past the hospital. It must be pointed out that the noise and vibration threat to the operation of the hospital must be given due regard during the highway construction period. Concern will be for the noise of construction vehicles (diesel operation:) which may require special muffling, for ground impact from vehicular motors, and for excavation operations, including blasting. It is clear that the present remarks have referenced primarily the conditions pertaining to St. Luke Hospital. The same general problems and considerations apply to the site of the Miller Hospital, except that, because of the somewhat greater distance and simpler opposite acoustic surroundings, the anticipated noise exposures are reduced by the order of 8 dB. Corresponding reduction in the vibration problem is totally unknown. We should again express our appreciation to the state and to Butler Engineering for the opportunity to meet these problems in a forthright and mutual sharing relationship. Please let us know whenever we may be of additional assistance. Respectfully submitted, a/ PSV mg Poul S. Veneklasen 4 N- S r 11111-- r Mr - r 111111 MIN MI M MI ON - r Architects/Engineers/Planners 333 Sibley Street Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 612/2226696 April 20, 1973 Walter Butler Engineering Company 175 Aurora Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55104 Gentlemen: Re: I35E Environmental Impact Study West 7th to Capital Approach St. Paul, Minnesota United Hospitals, Inc., St. Paul, Minnesota has directed Ellerbe Architects, Inc. to prepare and subnit to you this report of our findings of the environmental impact of the proposed 135E on their St. Luke's Division and Miller Division facilities. We request, on behalf of United Hospitals, Inc., that this report be included in your I35E Environmental Impact Study. On behalf of United Hospitals, Inc., we wish to express our appreciation for the opportunity pp y to submit this report and to have reviewed with you the preliminary findings of your Study. This report is directed to the impact of the I35E design recommendations established in your Study on the facilities of United Hospitals, Inc. Those portions of this report preceeded by an asterisk have been prepared by Paul S. Veneklasen & Associates, Consultants in Acoustics, Santa Monica, California, and are extracted from the attached report. In preceeding studies, we defined several of the detrimental affects of the proposed 135E. United Hospitals, Inc. has transmitted the following earlier studies to you: I35E Impact Study for United Hospitals, Inc. dated July 18, 1972. Supplemental I35E Impact Study Report of Measurements of Existing Noise Conditions at the St. Luke's Division facilities dated August 7, 1972. Supplemental I35E Impact Study, Report of Measurements of Existing Noise Conditions at the Miller Division facilities dated February 1, 1973. The proposed 135E, incorporating your design recommendations, will have the following impact on the facilities of United Hospitals, Inc.: St. Paul, Minn • Minneapolis, Minn • New Orleans, La • Irvine, Calif • San Jose, Calif • Rochester, Minn Overland Park, Kansas • Toledo, Ohio • Washington, D.C. • Anchorage, Alaska • Fairbanks, Alaska Walter Butler Engineering Company April 20, 1973 Page Two Noise Exposure at the St. Luke's Division Facilities and Outdoor Activity Areas Noise exposure to the patient rooms of the Hospital is of major concern because of the limitations placed on the Hospital's ability to remedy successfully the effects. The Hospital's closest patient windows are at the same elevation and within eighty- five (85) feet of the eastbound lanes of the proposed Interstate. Nearly all of the patient rooms are subject to the noise exposure, however, because of the cloverleaf configuration of the patient nursing unit tower which would act like canyons reflecting the noise to most of the rooms. Additionally, the terrain of the area requires a twenty-five (25) foot high retaining wall on the opposite side of the proposed Interstate which also creates a canyon effect and reinforces the noise exposure. The I35E design recommendations established in your study are the DOT L10-70, acoustical dampening in materials and details used, and cut and cover sections in the vicinity of the Hospital. "The U.S. Department of Transportation has currently established a noise criterion for achievement in highway design which requires noise reduction to be provided so as to reduce the noise so that a level of 70 dBA is not exceeded more than 10%of time. This limit is to hold o d at the nearest residential boundary or hospital. This is Category B of land use. The wording of Category A is such that this existing hospital facility could be appropriate )" tracts of land in which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary significance, and serve an important public need, and where the preservation of those qualities is essential if the area is to serve its intended purpose.") If this were ruled to be the case, then the noise level must be reduced to 60 dBA. Our primary concern has been for the interior of patient rooms, but we must not ignore the appropriate uses of exterior areas. Depending on vehicle flow rate and mix of passenger vehicles versus trucks, the L10-70 level may be reached at a distance between 200 and 400 feet from the outer road boundary, presuming continuing level terrain and no interposed con- trol device. When, as in the case of the hospital and many commercial and apartment buildings, the walls rise high above the level of the road bed, the achievement of these levels of residual exterior noise becomes extremely difficult, and the DOT regulations are not clear as to the extent (physically) of responsibility. Walter Butler Engineering Company April 20, 1973 Page Three Another problem is that by using the 10% of time criterion, the DOT places no restriction on maximum noise from diesel trucks which pass less than 10% of the time. Our research shows that maximums of current individual trucks may exceed the L10-70 limit by as much as 15 dB, that the legal limited trucks (88 dBA at 50 ft.) will exceed the L10-70 about 8 dB, and that if the practical sound barrier is used to achieve the L10-70 limit at 100 ft., the truck noise may exceed this limit by as much as 25 dB. A corollary problem is that in a hospital our controlling criterion for noise control must be concerned with the disturbance or interruption of sleeping patients, caused by maximum intermittent noises, whether they originate externally or internally. Therefore, we must design for the maximum noises from diesel trucks. Still another problem is that the narrow passage for the highway past the hospital is oppositely bounded by a steep embankment which will surely compli- cate and increase the noise exposure to a degree which can be determined only in acoustical model facility. We welcome the consideration of enclosing or covering a substantial length of the highway where it passes the hospital. We are concerned about the interruption of the enclosure with an open space of 150 ft., because an enclosed length of 300 ft. is not sufficient. We appreciate the ventilation problem. However, the sudden burst and squelch of the sound as a vehicle leaves and re-enters the enclosures will result in a sound character which may be more disturbing than the typical slower onset and subsidence. We have pointed out that even current passenger vehicles do not present a sound source which requires unduly burdensome acoustical design. If all other vehicles could have their noise reduced to this family, all would be well. Therefore, we have urged consideration of enclosure (i.e. covering) for only the truck (more specifically, noisy vehicle) lanes. To be specific with a proposal criterion, our studies suggest that, if the highway construction can assure that the maximum intermittent noise exposure (currently from individual diesel trucks) will not exceed 70 dBA at the surface of the hospital, then reasonable and practical construction will provide re- quired interior sound levels, and most of the hospital exterior grounds and potential roof garden or recreation areas will be tenable. Walter Butler Engineering Company April 20, 1973 Page Four Replacement of all existing window units with operable units with acoustically dampened glass could achieve an NC'•30 residual noise level in the patient rooms if the 70 dBA level at the surface of the Hospital were not exceeded. The cost of this remedial work would be approximately $110,000. In addition to the window replacement, it would be necessary to install a steady electro-acoustic background noise system to provide an NC'-25 to minimize the dynamic impact of the variable noise intrusion. This would cost approximately $7,500. Special windows and artificial background noise would be necessary for the proposed expansion facilities and would cost approximately $90,000 more than normal construction. If the noise exposure at the surface of the Hospital exceeds 70 dBA, studio type windows would be required to reduce the residual noise to an acceptable level. Code requirements for patient windows, however, require that all or a portion of the window be operable, which would not be possible with studio type windows. The recommended cut and cover sections would be beneficial to the interior areas and the outdoor activity areas, however, the planning and development potential of the complex would still be diminished. Noise exposure from equipment or procedures used during construction of the Inter- state would present similar problems to the patient rooms. Limitations on the equipment and procedures used and on the time of day of their use would be necessary. Noise Exposure at the Miller Division Facilities Noise exposure to the patient rooms of the Miller Hospital is of similar concern, even though the exposure at the surface of the Hospital would be less by the order of 8 dB. The Hospital's patient windows are within one hundred forty (140) feet of the west• bound lanes of the proposed Interstate and the terrain of the area does not require any retaining walls that would reinforce the noise exposure. The interchange with 194, however, prevents the use of cut and cover sections at the area of critical exposure to the Hospital. If the L10-70 exposure levels are not exceeded, remedial work could provide acceptable conditions within the patient rooms. Outdoor activity areas are shielded from the Interstates by the Hospital structures. N 11111 11111 err r it I S M- 1 r Walter Butler Engineering Company April 20, 1973 Page Five Replacement of existing windows facing the proposed Interstate and its interchange with 194 with operable units with acoustically dampened glass to achieve an NC'-30 residual noise level would cost up to $150,000. The installation of a steady electro-acoustic background noise system to provide an NC'-25 to minimize the dynamic impact of the variable noise intrusion would cost up to $10,000. The inability to provide studio type windows with an operable sash and the limita- tions required during the construction process would apply to this facility as well. Vibration at the St. Luke's Division Facilities Transmission of vehicle generated vibrations to the structure of the Hospital is of major concern because of the delicate functions and equipment within the Hospital. The transmittal of vibrations has not been explored to date because the final design criteria for the Interstate roadbed, surface material, joints, base and subgrade has not been established. It is known, however, that the Hospital structure bears on rock and that the proposed Interstate roadbed will be about twelve (12) feet above the rock level and the eastbound lanes of the Interstate will be about eighty-five (85) feet from the exterior wall of the Surgery Department of the Hospital. 'The magnitude of the problem is dependent primarily on the character of the substrata on which the highway is laid and on which the hospital foundations rest. Secondarily, the precision of the road surface and its transverse joints are determinants. Butler Engineering is clearly aware of the problem. Applicable qualitative data is sparse. Search for vibration tolerance for specific equipment is usually fruitless. Under the circumstances, it is risky to suggest a criterion for achievement. Nevertheless, we feel that some guidance is necessary. Therefore, we suggest the following values for the residual vibration in the floor of the surgery. These values are frankly the tactile limits for vibration sensitivity, postulating that the vibration may be transmitted directly into operating tables. Criteria for Residual Vibration dB re 1 peak g Frequency in Hz 1 5 10 50 100 250 500 Vibration level -78 -70 -68 -60 -58 48 20 Walter Butler Engineering Company April 20, 1973 Page Six The achievement of these criteria, or other demonstrably satisfactory values, presents a difficult design task, probably with large economic impact. The solution may conceivably be achieved in the design of the road bed. Alternately, to provide solution in the present hospital facilities is awesome. If the main structure will tolerate higher values, then floor vibration can be greatly attenuated using floating floor design which is standard in our group for TV and recording studios; but this measure in the existing operating rooms would be problematic. Unfortunately, we cannot chart solution to this problem. But it is important that we stress herein the existence and importance of the problem, which must clearly be faced and attacked quantitatively if the highway proceeds past the hospital. The following concerns are expressed at this time: a) Humanly detectable vibrations would be disturbing to patients, staff and employees in any part of the Hospital and would be intolerable in areas such as Surgery because of eye surgery, neurosurgery, open-heart surgery and other delicate procedures presently being performed at United Hospitals. b) Vibrations below the level of human detectability would be intolerable for sensitive equipment such as microscopes, scanners, balances, monitors, etc. that could not be successfully isolated. c) Vibrations could have long-term effects on the Hospital facilities by settling slabs on grade. Further evaluation of the magnitude and effects of the transmitted vibrations would be required before costs of remedial work could be determined. Such remedial costs may be limited to isolation consoles for special equipment or could require relocation of some departmental functions to new areas isolated fromthe structure at costs of up to $120 per square foot for the special areas. Vibrations from equipment or procedures used during construction of the Interstate would present similar problems to the normal operation of the Hospital. Limitations on the equipment and procedures used and on the time of day of their use would be necessary. Walter Butler Engineering Company April 20, 1973 Page Seven Air Pollution at the St. Luke's Division Facilities Vehicle emission air pollution is of major concern at the St. Luke's Division facility because the fresh air intake for air handling units supplying air to the lower four stories of the Hospital is located at the same elevation and within eighty five (85) feet of the eastbound lanes of the proposed Interstate. These air handling units supply air to Surgery, Recovery, Emergency, Radiology, Pathology, Dietary, Central Services, Pharmacy, Nurseries and Intensive Care, Coronary Care and Acute Care patient areas. The 135E design recommendation established in your Study is the 1975 Federal Ambient Air Quality Standards. The level of carbon monoxide concentrations permissible by the air quality standards would not be sufficient to cause carbonic hemoglobin levels in blood in excess of the 5% tolerable level given as criteria for coronary heart disease and emphysema patients by the U.S. Public Health Service report "Air Quality Criteria for Carbon Monoxide", AP 62, U.S.P.H.S., March, 1970. The levels of concen- tration of other harmful pollutants permissible by the standards would necessitate the addition of activated carbon filters and replacement of fan units at a cost of up to $50,000. If the terrain, unfavorable weather conditions and traffic congestion are capable of producing levels of air pollution in excess of the air quality standards, the Hospital air intakes will have to be relocated at a cost of $200,000 or more. The effect the recommended cut and cover sections over the proposed Interstate adjacent to the Hospital would have on pollutant levels has not been determined at this time and cannot be determined until a design for the cut and cover sections is developed. The fresh air intake for air handling units supplying air to the upper four stories of the Hospital is located eighty-five (85) feet above and within one hundred sixty (160) feet of the eastbound lanes of the proposed Interstate. Remedial work or relocation of this intake is not envisioned at this time, but further evaluation will be required. Air pollution from equipment or procedures used during construction of the Interstate would present similar problems to the normal operation of the Hospital. Specia' procedures may be required to minimize airborne dust and emissions from equipment may need to be controlled. Walter Butler Engineering Company April 20, 1973 Page Eight Vibration and Air Pollution at the Miller Division Facilities. Vibration problems and air pollution problems at the Miller Division facilities are of concern, but have not been evaluated at this time. Effects of Vehicle Lights at the St. Luke's Division Facilities. Vehicle lights affecting patient rooms at the St- Luke's Division facilities may necessitate the addition of blinds or heavy drapes. Further evaluation of this problem will be possible after the extent of implementation of the recommended cut and cover sections is determined. The environmental impact of the proposed Interstate incorporating the design recom- mendations of your Study is evaluated above as extensively as is practical at this time. The costs of remedial work stated above are developed from preliminary determinations of potential solutions. If the proposed Interstate is developed adjacent to United Hospitals, it would be essential to incorporate design solutions into the proposed Interstate to minimize the impact to the facilities of United Hospitals. Evaluation and testing of the design solution will be necessary, and the costs of such evaluation and testing is to be included in considering the economic impact of the proposed Interstate on United Hospitals, Inc. Respectfully submitted, ELLERBE ARCHITECTS, INC. Qom. -cam._ Alan C. Balhorn -IMO - - MO - - NIB- - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 APPENDIX 7 RESOLUTIONS AND CORRESPONDENCE REGARDING PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS AFFECTED BY PROPOSED I-35E (WEST 7TH STREET TO CAPITOL APPROACH COMPLEX) 1. CITY COUNCIL OF ST. PAUL RESOLUTION NO. 256380, NOVEMBER 16, 1971, REGARDING PARKS IN GENERAL 2. CITY COUNCIL OF ST. PAUL RESOLUTION NO. 257626, MARCH 7, 1974, REGARDING CATHEDRAL PARK 3. CORRESPONDENCE FROM ST. PAUL BOARD OF EDUCATION'S CONSULTING ARCHITECT TO CHIEF ENGINEER OF ST. PAUL DATED NOVEMBER 8, 1971, REGARDING JEFFERSON SCHOOL AND LINDSAY SCHOOL PLAYGROUNDS A. 7-2 A. 7-3 A. 7-4 r r r r r r r r r — r r r INN STATE OF MINNESOTAIl County of Ramsey 1ss. CITY OP SAINT PAUL Harry E. Idarsha11,) Clty Clerk of the City of Saint Pau!, Minnesota do hereby certify that I have compared the attached copy of Councll File No ?2:,180 as adopted by the Clty Council Nov. 16, 19 71 and approved by the Mayor Nov. 17, 19 71 with the original thereof on file in my office. I further certify that said copy is a true and correct copy of said original and the whole thereof. WITNESS my hand and the Beal of the City of Saint Paul, Minn.. this 18th. day of P!ov. v- J City Clerk. ORIGINAL TO CIT, CLIEEK PRESENTED BY CONUISSIONEIL_ CITY OF ST. PAUL OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK COUNCIL RESOLUTION —GENERAL FORM DATE COUNCIL f . 1." 1 ("y E+L. Y WHEREAS, The Federal Department of Transportation requires the Minn- esota Highway Department to secure the concurrence of the controlling agency of any public lands adjacent to proposed trunk highway improve- ments, and; WHEREAS, The City of St. Paul has reviewed and approved the preliminary plans fer T.H. 35E as early as July 31, 1957, C.F. #163958, with subsequent approvals on November 18, 1969 C.F. r11246334 and on June 7, 1971 C.F. 6254328, and; WHEREAS, The right -of• -way for this project has been substantially ac- quired, and; WHEREAS, The project will have no apparent adverse effect on city operations, and; WHEREAS, The portions being acquired for right-of-way Is•of no local, state, or national significance for recreational purposes, and; WHEREAS, The portion being taken for right-of-way will have no un- deslrablr. effect on the remainder, now therefore, be it; RESOLVED, That all possible planning has been don to minimize harm to the adjacent pub!ic lands. row n ; 'Asst. COUNCILMEN Yeas Nays Butler Carisarr Levine Meredith Sprafka Tedesco Mr. President, McCa.'ty NOV i e 1117` Adopted by the Council 19 A' proved. }"!1v ? _ . y --19-- Favor �. 'a. •..`, J �yor __Against SPATE OF MINNESOTA County of Ramsey }se. CITY OF SAINT PAUL lfarry E. Marshall, ...............City Clerk of the City of Saint Paul, Minnesota do hereby certify that 1 have compared the attached copy of Council File No 257626 as adopted by the Clty Council...__.... March_. 7,...._.._..... 19 72 and approved by the Mayor March 7, 19 72 with the original thereof on Ale In my office. I further certify that said copy le a true and correct copy of said original and the whole thereof. WITNESS my hand and the seal of the Cityof Saint Paul, Minn.. this 8th day Of .k1a , cA. D. 19..7r7 'City Clerk. r� OMIG.MAL •o um pine CITY OF ST. PAUL OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK _ COUNCIL RESOLU1ION—GENERAL FORM r.rse!rrre tr , ; p.71A 41`SIOIItL � DAI£ cOu"c,t NO 4RtERLAS, The Federal Covarnmui.t of Transportation requires the Minn_- sote Highway department to secure the concurrence of the controlling agency of any public lands adjacent to proposed trunk highway improvements, and; 'dItEPC.A.S, The Clty of St. Paul has reviewed and apnroved the preliminary plans for trunk Highway 35E as early as .i_!Y 31, 1957, C.F. Ito. 1639';(', wilt' subsequent approvals on November ill, C.F. No. 246334 and on June 7, I)71. C.F. Ho. 254328, and; WHEREAS, The proposed Trunk Highway 35E construction will require use of a snail segment of the tract known cs Cutedra! Park, and; WHEREAS, Said tract In its entirety his no national, State, or local significance as a public park, recreation ar,a, wildlife and waterfowl refuge, or historic site, and; WHEREAS, There exists no plans whatsoever, for development of said tract of Iced for park or recreation purposes, new therefore, be it`• RESOLVED, The City Council of St. Paul, Minnesota endor.,es and ratifies the freeway location and attendant construction on Kellogg Blvd: i.nd further finds that said construction involves no lands which fall within the intent of Section 4f of U. S. Department of Transportation Act. COUNCILMEN Yeas Nays Butler— Carlson - Levine Meredith Sprafka _Against Tedesco Mr. President, McCarty n Favor PUBLISHED MAR 11 ',4i" MAR 7 Adopted by the Council 19 7 ,n r. . ��----�� tfnyor - =II Ell MO Ell - - - - 1 1 1 1 THE SAINT PAUL PUBLIC SCHOOLS CIS CITY HALL. SAINT PAUL 2, MINNESOTA OFFICE OF CONSULTING ARCHITECT November 8, 1971 Mr. Richard A. Schnarr Chief Engineer Department of Public Works 234 City Hall Saint. Paul, Minnesota, 55102 RE: LINDSAY AND JEFFERSON SCHOOLS Dear Mr. Schnarr: r17: Y'.7 n ., •� .-� _ -r OM Nov 12 i5fi DEPT. OF PU sL;C WWC~;CS TRAFF;C BUREAU Your letter of August 3, 1971 has been received, and on behalf of the Board of Education, I will answer for them. With respect to Jefferson School and Lindsay School playground ac- quisitions, the following statements represent the position of the Saint Paul Public Schools: 1. The proposed acquisition of school district property adjacent to Trunk Highway 35E will have no adverse effects on the subject schools' operation. 2. The subject schools are not considered, by the School Board, to be a significant public recreation area. 3. The School Board recognizes that the proposed highway planning has been conducted with the intent to minimize harm to affected areas. If I can be of any further service, please advise. Yours truly, /// > ���/� n /Je$e�`T. Sigvertse\i ✓'�" -- / Consulting Architect JTS:Ik cc: Mr. William C. Merritt, Dept. of Highways A.7-4 APPENDIX 8 UNITED STATES CENSUS DATA FOR CENSUS TRACTS NEAR PROPOSED I-35E IN ST. PAUL 1. SUMMARY OF POPULATION AND MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME CHANGES, 1950, 1960, 1970 2. SUMMARY OF DATA ON AUTOMOBILE OWNERSHIP AND MODE OF TRANSPORT TO AND FROM WORK, 1960, 1970 3. SUMMARY OF DATA ON HOUSING UNITS, 1950, 1960, 1970 4. POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS, 1970 (Reprints from the 1970 Census of Populations for the Minneapolis - St. Paul, Minnesota Urbanized Area) A. 8-2 A. 8-3 A. 8-4 A. 8-5 - A. 8-28 A.8-1 POPULATIONS IN CENSUS TRACTS NEAR PROPOSED I-35E IN SAINT PAUL (WEST 7TH STREET TO CAPITOL APPROACH COMPLEX) 1950, 1960, 1970 CENSUS TRACT 1950 1960 1970 336 4528 2412 1779 337 5595 2069 1323 340 4540 3657 2486 342 2294 1521 2151 351 3893 3941 4328 355 5069 4516 3359 356 2820 2623 2333 357 3550 3528 3480 358 4545 3997 3755 359 4115 2919 1849 360 3740 2739 2207 365 4650 4873 4734 367 4966 5350 4981 368 4061 3533 3272 369 4575 4110 2897 TOTALS 62941 51788 44934 Source: U.S. Census - 1950, 1960, 1970 MEDIAN INCOME PER FAmILY IN CENSUS TRACTS NEAR PROPOSED I-35E IN SAINT PAUL (WEST 7TH STREET TO CAPITOL APPROACH COMPLEX) 1950, 1960, 1970 CENSUS TRACT 1950 1960 1970 336 $2286 $5256 $5600 337 2455 4921 9206 340 4540 3657 2486 342 1444 7432 351 2182 7948 12414 355 2861 5213 6418 356 3313 7128 9592 357 3675 8758 12913 358 3039 5950 9591 359 2297 4597 8043 360 2810 5316 8114 365 4095 6930 10837 367 4707 6668 10471 368 3304 6050 9831 369 3013 5601 8507 Source: U.S. Census - 1950, 1960, 1970 A.8 -2 AUTOMOBILE. OWNERSHIP IN CENSUS TRACTS NEAR PROPOSED I-35E IN SAINT PAUL (WEST 7TH STREET TO CAPITOL APPROACH COMPLEX) 1960, 1970 1960 1970 3 or More 3 or More CENSUS 1-Car 2-Car Cars in Total* 1-Car 2-Car Cars in Total* TRACT Family Family Family Cars Family Family Family Cars 336 422 21 6 482 256 94 5 459 337 354 73 5 515 239 54 8 - 371 340 698 65 39 955 438 95 8 652 342 215 15 5 260 205 6 24 289 351 657 245 19 12Q4 601 207 82 1261 355 837 128 49 1240 647 81 25 884 356 590 142 21 937 457 126 16 757 357 563 277 58 1291 497 368 82 1479 358 944 174 51 1445 861 272 39 1522 359 374 121 11 649 343 84 7 532 360 543 46 0 635 322 70 7 403 365 1031 289 30 1699 1011 409 46 1967 367 991 325 48 1785 868 406 93 1959 368 680 148 20 1036 577 239 24 1127 369 664 139 37 1053 544 143 7 851 TOTALS 9563 2208 399 15186 7866 2654 473 14593 *Total Cars based on assumption of 3 cars in 3-car or more column Source: U.S. Census - 1960, 1970 MODE OF TRANSPORT TO AND FROM WORK IN CENSUS TRACTS NEAR PROPOSED I-35E IN SAINT PAUL (WEST 7TH STREET TO CAPITOL APPROACH COMPLEX) 1960, 1970 1960 1970 By Private By Private CENSUS Total Car or To St. Paul Total Car or To St. Paul TRACT Employees Car Pool By Bus City Employees Car Pool By Bus C. B. D. City* 336 835 422 285 649 450 318 126 70 307 337 877 358 202 731 489 262 124 76 305 340 1372 651 440 1251 764 377 229 109 449 342 974 146 147 815 1038 157 202 499 806 351 1527 931 224 1234 1928 939 216 178 1295 355 1959 895 593 1570 1123 658 239 201 712 356 1328 740 321 1157 1022 696 239 175 674 357 1362 964 174 1144 1323 1069 157 254 994 358 1881 1056 422 1465 1723 1078 346 349 1278 359 1015 448 181 832 93- 478 181 113 614 360 839 440 161 705 714 44Z 130 150 495 365 2107 1467 396 1807 CJ17 1495 305 127 1110 367 2141 1651 372 1844 2070 1714 226 365 1561 368 1297 859 278 1096 1238 '18 196 256 1080 369 1475 C72 251 1260 1062 745 212 146 815 Note: Those who walk to and from work not included. C. B.D. is Central Business District *Includes C.B.D. workers. Source: U. S. Census - 1960, 1970 A. 8-3 HOUSING UNITS IN CENSUS TRACTS NEAR PROPOSED I-35E IN SAINT PAUL (WEST 7TH STREET TO CAPITOL APPROACH COMPLEX) 1950, 1960, 1970 1950 1960 1970 Units % Units % Units °A Built Built Built Built Built Built CENSUS Total Before Before Total Before Before Total Before Before TRACT Units 1939 1939 Units 1939 1939 Units 1939 1939 336 1345 1345 100.0 773 769 99. 5 697 519 74.5 337 1834 1820 99.2 827 820 99.2 698 171 24.5 340 1863 1775 95.3 1826 1778 97.4 1400 1063 75.9 342 290 239 82.4 1035 1035 100.0 1556 1110 71.3 351 1096 1010 92.2 1129 1014 89.8 1120 936 83.6 355 2175 1945 89.4 2380 2287 96. 1 1881 1451 77. 1 356 992 960 96.8 1028 1014 98.6 979 881 90.0 357 1118 1030 92. 1 1138 1103 96.9 1121 1095 97.7 358 1757 1665 94.8 1775 1685 94.9 1906 1719 90.2 359 1436 1415 98.5 1271 1212 95.4 729 643 88.2 360 1436 1170 81.5 903 903 100.0 845 767 90.8 365 1429 1040 72.8 1683 1174 69.8 1846 1126 61.0 367 1398 1295 92.6 1665 1252 75.2 1784 1085 60.8 368 1156 1040 90.0 1106 1068 96.6 1093 959 87.7 369 1337 1310 98.0 1249 1207 96.8 1053 976 92.7 TOTALS 20662 19059 92.2 19788 18321 92.6 17588 14501 82.4 Source: U.S. Census - 1950, 1960, 1970 Table P-1. General Characteristics of the Population: 1970-Continued (For minimum base for derived figures (percent. median, etc.) and meaning of symbols, see text) Census Tracts RACE White Negro Al panics Percent Negro AGE BY SEX Male, d ayes Under 5 years 3 and 4 years 5 to 9 years 5 years 6 years 10 10 14 years 14 years 15 to 19 years 15 years____ 16 years 17 years _ 18 years 19 years 20 to 24 years 20 years 21 vears 25 to 34 years 35 to 44 years 45 to 54 years 55 to 59 years 60 to 64 years__________ 65 to 74 years 75 years and over Fund*, a qes Under 5 years 3 and 4 years S to 9 years 5 years 6 year5_______________________________________ 10 to 14 years__ 14 years 15 to 19 yeors______ 15 years 16 years __________________ ________ _________ 17 years 18 years 19 years 20 to 24 years 20 years____ 21 years 25 to 34 years 35 to 44 years 45 to 54 years 55 re 59 yeors 60 to 64 years__ 65 to 74 years____ 75 years and over RELATIONSHIP TO HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD AR parsecs In households Head of household Head of family__ Primary individual Wife of head Other relative of heod Not related to head In group quarters Persons per household TYPE OF FAMILY AND NUMBER OF OWN CHILDREN AN faotiGs With own children under 18 years Number of children He,bu.d.wile fe.IWi With own children under 18 years Number of children Percent of total under 18 yeors Families with ether wale bead With own children under 18 years Number of children ____________________ Families with female heed With own children under 18 years Number of children Percent of total under 18 years Persons under 18 years MARITAL STATUS Single Married ___ Separated Widowed Pinorced Male, 14 years *Id ad eve ngle Morrieo Separated Widowed Divorced hotels, 14 yaws Old ad ever St. Paul -Con. Tract Troct Troct Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Traci 0320 0321 0322 0323 0324 0325 0326 0327 0328 0329 0330 0331 0332 C333 0334 3 482 3 453 3 072 4 212 2 759 4 221 3 US 2 795 1 944 2 242 1 003 2 513 2 274 4 323 3 010 3 451 3 387 3 032 4 170 2 722 4 128 3 772 2 704 1 858 1 751 1 772 2 467 2 229 4 284 2 930 6 23 27 26 14 43 12 18 11 353 4 _ 7 19 64 0.2 0.7 0.9 0.6 0.5 1.0 0.3 0.6 0.6 15.7 0.2 - 0.3 04 2.1 1 637 1 532 1 452 1 969 1 204 2 001 1 034 1 366 774 895 795 1 000 1 070 2 034 1 276 154 122 125 170 118 198 207 149 65 144 94 128 86 194 121 67 39 53 72 41 87 83 56 21 67 31 55 30 76 48 149 76 139 189 117 195 206 150 44 195 69 78 91 212 73 27 17 24 36 70 42 51 35 9 44 15 21 17 49 15 32 14 28 36 19 43 41 32 8 48 12 17 25 38 19 131 87 133 205 132 167 184 122 43 183 67 105 56 228 87 25 14 27 40 21 28 38 27 11 33 7 17 13 45 17 131 237 148 168 107 172 162 129 64 81 64 97 81 167 181 33 21 29 40 31 31 34 31 5 20 16 24 12 40 8 34 13 15 36 22 38 39 32 12 27 10 17 11 29 17 22 20 22 32 24 27 24 31 8 17 8 20 12 33 23 29 89 37 29 17 38 35 20 20 10 17 16 22 32 63 13 94 45 31 13 38 30 15 19 7 13 20 24 33 70 164 313 147 154 109 196 172 99 85 29 83 125 136 247 231 20 115 27 39 17 27 28 14 21 5 17 19 21 49 72 29 91 35 35 21 41 32 20 18 4 9 23 29 54 53 232 188 179 237 138 268 216 165 90 64 88 141 204 304 145 147 104 118 177 119 170 157 115 71 50 77 90 97 178 76 167 120 114 193 136 198 148 126 91 38 87 104 106 164 85 95 58 80 116 91 133 103 75 51 18 36 54 61 84 50 94 62 69 103 62 92 93 68 39 17 32 46 38 80 49 121 107 115 167 95 150 121 99 72 36 51 73 65 102 86 52 58 85 90 60 62 65 69 59 40 47 47 49 74 92 1 HS 1 921 1 620 2 243 1 475 2 220 2 011 1 429 1 170 1 347 1 000 1 425 1 204 2 289 1 734 133 115 116 177 126 217 197 134 64 141 72 101 98 !74 85 59 44 43 74 49 80 66 51 23 62 27 27 34 76 23 130 82 131 206 128 168 162 146 41 199 69 103 69 183 74 28 20 28 42 29 40 26 32 4 42 18 22 12 36 12 33 18 33 38 21 29 33 31 15 31 13 17 17 36 15 139 82 114 193 115 171 162 132 45 186 82 110 59 187 78 20 19 16 41 22 29 36 20 10 28 19 21 14 34 15 110 302 190 174 116 162 171 113 154 201 88 130 85 194 277 22 18 18 39 27 34 22 15 7 23 19 16 7 30 13 26 16 16 35 18 29 39 20 5 26 13 19 11 36 17 16 18 25 34 25 33 38 28 13 16 15 21 5 40 14 24 127 78 41 22 37 39 29 67 65 21 31 29 39 110 22 123 53 25 24 29 33 21 62 71 20 43 33 49 123 247 390 193 179 141 236 205 122 224 145 105 174 169 255 358 37 134 50 45 27 55 44 25 72 62 29 44 28 59 113 61 119 54 37 26 51 51 27 61 41 26 48 43 50 104 226 185 166 229 147 240 228 163 76 132 88 145 143 293 139 141 96 112 219 127 177 157 124 61 98 68 99 87 167 81 222 128 141 246 155 243 211 137 96 51 106 144 104 206 139 112 112 94 127 103 136 117 80 71 23 46 79 53 125 93 122 109 108 132 99 126 132 84 71 19 41 85 63 121 69 167 196 156 228 143 203 175 123 124 55 111 132 112 204 157 96 124 99 133 75 141 94 71 143 97 132 123 162 180 184 3 442 3 453 3 072 4 212 2 759 4 221 3 045 2 795 1 944 2 242 1 $03 2 513 2 274 4 323 3 010 3 474 2 698 2 842 4 175 2 759 4 221 3 777 2 762 1 557 1 922 1 792 2 274 2 099 4 236 2 212 1 290 1 194 963 1 373 933 1 466 1 297 945 751 481 717 858 883 1 531 898 943 659 739 1 063 749 1 121 956 680 337 353 419 535 500 952 570 347 535 224 310 184 345 341 265 414 128 298 323 383 579 328 816 550 628 918 633 919 745 530 252 165 306 403 414 772 4611 1 270 845 1 167 1 828 1 160 1 729 1 653 1 228 469 1 260 729 962 680 1770 775 98 109 84 56 33 107 82 59 85 16 40 51 122 159 76; 8 755 230 37 - - 68 33 387 320 11 239 175 87 798 2.69 2.26 2.95 3.04 2.96 2.88 2.91 2.92 2.07 4.00 2.50 2.65 2.38 2.77 2 45 i 943 659 739 1 063 749 1 121 956 600 337 353 419 535 500 952 570 423 297 347 506 352 543 512 371 137 285 218 287 227 483 253 960 623 841 1 326 853 1 245 1 228 928 316 1 120 496 706 492 1 319 581 416 550 628 918 633 919 745 530 252 165 306 403 414 772 461 372 263 313 460 310 465 393 295 104 120 157 215 195 419 209 854 567 780 1 234 768 1 095 970 751 253 509 377 561 435 1 183 495 86.3 84.6 88.3 91.0 87.0 83.7 73.8 75.9 71.9 43.2 70.6 75.6 84.1 85.4 81.1 27 22 25 21 20 48 21 26 10 4 21 24 18 35 19 8 4 4 3 6 6 3 6 3 3 4 8 2 6 4 20 9 8 3 10 10 6 11 6 15 8 15 2 9 6 100 07 66 124 96 154 190 124 75 184 92 108 68 145 90 43 30 30 43 36 72 116 70 30 162 57 64 30 58 40 86 47 53 89 75 140 252 166 57 596 111 130 55 127 80 8.7 7.0 6.0 6.6 8.5 10.7 19.2 16.8 16.2 50.6 20.8 17.5 10.6 9.2 131 989 670 883 1 356 883 1 308 1 314 990 352 1 177 534 742 517 1 386 610 1 220 1 261 1 002 1 445 930 1 469 1 27S 972 633 406 572 794 ISO 1 445 1 012 308 576 346 406 229 393 366 314 212 161 172 271 290 529 424 845 592 664 939 654 964 794 571 311 198 331 436 461 821 500 14 16 11 4 9 28 23 18 21 11 15 11 13 14 11 35 39 43 54 30 54 50 45 38 30 39 30 28 42 Si 40 54 29 46 25 58 65 42 72 17 30 57 71 53 33 1 463 1 661 1 275 1 708 1 128 1 693 1 526 1 037 1 030 849 804 1 132 992 1 779 1 512 361 798 407 443 259 363 361 229 442 372 192 391 284 595 688 846 594 666 959 662 978 823 594 307 246 342 461 450 838 499 10 17 13 16 17 32 55 35 22 58 19 25 17 25 15 204 204 163 243 156 264 211 145 214 131 204 188 203 250 243 52 65 39 63 51 88 131 69 67 100 66 92 55 96 87 CENSUS TRACTS A.8-5 MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL, MINN., SMSA P-29 Table P-1. General Characteristics of the Population: 1970-Continued (For minimum base for derived figures (percent, median, etc.) and meaning of symbols, see text] St. Poul - Con. Census Tracts RACE AN person White Negro Percent Negro - AGE BY SEX Mole, all egos Under 5 years 3 and 4 years 5 to 9 years 5 years 6 years 10 to 14 years 4 yeors 15 to 19 years 5 years 6 years 7 years 8 years 9 yeors 20 l0 24 years 20 years_---'-- _________ --'-'21 years 25 to 34 yeors 35 to 44 years---------------'-'45 to 54 years__ 55 to 59 years 60 to 64 years 65 to 74 yeors 75 years and over female, aN apes Under 5 years 3 and 4 yeors 5 to 9 years 5 years 6 years 10 to 14 yeors 4 years 15 to 19 years----- ___________ 5 years 6 years 7 yeors 8 years 9 yeors___________ 20 to 24 years 20 yeors 21 years 25 to 34 years---------- ____________________ ---'- 35 to 44 yeors 45 to 54 years 55 to 59 years 60 to 64 years 65 to 74 yeors 75 years omit aver__ RELATIONSHIP TO HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD AN persons In households Head of household Head of family Primary individual Wife of head Other relative of head Not related to heod In group quarters Persons per household TYPE OF FAMILY AND NUMBER OF OWN CHILDREN Troct Troct Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract 0335 0336 0337 0338 0339 0340 0342 0344 0345 0346 0347 0348 0349 0350 0351 AN families With own children under 18 years Number of children Hesb.sd-woo twain With own children under 18 yeors Number of children Percent of total under 18 years Fom8Ms with .tier mole Mod With own children under 18 years _ Number of children Fomios with foweM Med With own children under 18 years Number of children Percent of total under 18 years Persons under 18 years MARITAL STATUS lisle, 14 years oil .oil ever Single Married Separated_________ Widowed Divorced Female, 14 y.ers .Id sad over Single Married Separated Widowed --'-_____ _________________ __'__"_' Divorced 3 382 1 734 1 368 2 534 1 932 2 446 2 166 2 949 4 866 8 707 7 547 2 437 4 550 3 897 4 328 865 699 993 467 659 1 814 2 053 2 915 4 838 8 668 7 507 2 426 4 512 3 849 4 159 2 484 973 310 2 044 1 207 572 58 1 1 13 11 1 4 20 114 73.4 56.1 22.7 80.7 62.5 23.0 2.7 - - 0.1 0.1 - 0.1 0.5 2.6 1 530 824 557 1 223 1 000 1 101 1 244 1 377 2 293 4 011 3 720 1 229 2 422 1 824 1 939 113 101 65 130 94 97 2 175 255 335 345 86 174 162 103 45 39 24 46 33 36 1 75 99 114 135 38 63 65 35 130 89 49 163 96 61 3 132 275 376 390 100 171 241 128 24 17 13 22 27 15 1 26 44 69 69 15 33 32 21 28 20 11 35 17 12 - 32 51 69 81 23 35 49 27 156 90 28 175 91 49 6 142 271 433 456 108 178 252 152 23 14 4 34 12 6 3 29 40 87 98 21 33 57 26 168 95 25 120 82 63 37 114 202 403 421 125 498 176 483 43 22 2 23 20 5 4 17 39 90 96 25 21 36 24 44 25 5 34 14 9 5 19 39 80 100 30 35 29 28 32 18 4 25 11 21 4 21 46 86 84 22 36 44 37 25 14 7 24 13 17 9 30 39 85 75 24 173 29 179 24 16 7 14 24 11 15 27 39 62 66 24 233 38 215 115 46 65 58 69 85 77 135 170 336 277 178 479 193 350 28 15 8 19 14 15 19 20 25 51 56 25 214 35 134 29 10 13 12 18 10 16 24 30 57 51 23 118 44 108 156 59 90 133 100 133 132 210 307 456 452 135 253 227 202 154 58 45 118 123 117 167 117 206 384 418 121 176 140 149 178 89 38 106 120 120 211 119 212 448 474 138 164 154 126 85 41 33 59 44 67 117 55 89 220 170 52 78 54 50 65 37 24 49 63 86 130 49 87 172 128 44 74 64 50 119 74 54 78 85 126 197 76 132 283 137 85 105 86 79 91 45 41 34 33 97 165 53 87 165 52 57 72 75 67 1 852 910 811 1 311 932 1 385 922 1 572 2 573 4 696 3 827 1 208 2 128 2 073 2 389 138 93 68 121 85 98 3 181 241 329 298 77 187 181 149 62 37 24 46 30 43 - 63 95 147 139 36 89 75 60 142 95 48 148 96 74 2 149 260 386 386 95 179 215 165 26 15 12 24 21 16 - 29 47 77 66 11 34 50 40 24 16 11 32 16 20 1 35 54 75 67 27 43 41 33 165 97 35 160 80 40 5 142 293 428 424 87 158 230 140 30 22 7 31 12 9 3 31 46 79 88 19 29 29 22 171 84 44 130 78 102 93 121 247 389 406 94 152 191 544 33 16 9 35 18 14 6 20 50 73 82 22 25 31 36 39 18 5 24 19 4 3 20 53 91 93 28 29 37 37 39 15 8 29 16 9 3 25 51 84 79 13 34 35 45 30 19 8 16 15 27 47 27 56 65 77 16 26 45 187 30 16 14 26 10 48 34 29 37 76 75 15 38 43 239 130 66 84 92 76 163 108 178 249 400 342 59 190 22) 378 38 22 13 23 16 42 39 26 46 75 80 10 30 56 160 28 14 16 20 18 47 28 42 62 69 71 12 37 49 110 178 76 88 154 114 116 44 210 304 460 457 135 239 197 209 180 69 53 160 97 106 51 116 215 432 437 126 165 170 143 213 80 66 115 102 121 78 146 243 543 510 149 210 179 154 112 44 44 65 47 97 60 76 119 243 200 74 117 76 86 94 49 48 57 41 100 66 61 95 210 121 80 117 96 77 172 93 82 74 77 213 194 112 187 460 170 151 226 174 211 157 64 151 35 39 155 218 80 120 416 76 81 188 143 133 3 382 1 734 1 368 2 534 1 932 2 486 2 166 2 949 4 866 8 707 7 547 2 437 4 550 3 897 4 328 3 316 1 734 1 219 2 534 1 879 2 216 1 623 2 904 4 860 8 340 7 522 2 260 3 855 3 886 3 117 1 248 631 550 779 790 1 204 1 429 1 043 1 501 2 793 2 181 793 1 361 1 161 1 107 783 353 282 590 392 467 119 682 1 171 2 152 1 887 562 949 829 735 465 278 268 189 398 737 1310 361 330 641 294 231 412 332 372 601 218 202 399 235 314 91 537 967 1 896 1 729 500 809 693 624 1 370 829 406 1 279 782 614 56 1 266 2 310 3 553 3 504 918 1 618 1 892 1 307 97 56 61 77 72 84 47 58 82 98 108 49 67 140 79 66 - 149 - 53 270 543 45 6 367 25 177 695 11 1 211 2.66 2.75 2.22 3.25 2.38 1.84 1.14 2.78 3.24 2.99 3.45 2.85 2.83 3.35 2.82 783 353 282 590 392 467 119 682 1 171 2 152 1 887 562 949 829 735 374 204 134 357 215 211 10 408 665 1 125 1 134 256 453 462 380 931 600 307 989 572 446 19 984 1 806 2 712 2 761 682 1 204 1 445 1 005 601 218 202 399 235 314 91 537 967 1 896 1 729 500 809 693 624 273 112 85 218 113 114 5 315 564 1 031 1 060 239 427 414 352 695 338 186 605 298 254 9 774 1 559 2 529 2 587 653 1 159 1318 955 64.7 49.8 57.1 56.7 46.6 52.8 19.6 74.2 83.2 90.6 91.3 94.2 94.5 88.3 91.5 18 23 11 25 25 18 10 16 35 46 28 10 26 27 13 4 6 2 11 7 5 2 3 9 6 11 3 5 6 6 8 11 4 26 10 10 2 12 29 9 27 7 8 16 11 164 112 69 166 132 135 18 129 169 210 130 52 114 109 98 97 86 47 128 95 92 . 3 90 92 88 63 14 21 42 22 228 251 117 358 264 182 8 198 218 174 147 22 37 111 39 21.2 37.0 35.9 33.6 41.3 37.8 17.4 19.0 11.6 6.2 5 2 3.2 3.0 7.4 3.7 1 074 679 326 1 067 640 481 46 1 043 1 873 2 791 2 833 693 1 227 1 493 1 044 1 154 558 419 789 731 900 1 236 957 1 532 2 954 2 627 956 1 932 1 226 1 582 364 178 136 274 252 321 590 294 430 786 777 404 1 056 443 900 654 266 233 430 319 388 259 570 1 011 1 980 1 776 514 820 724 648 28 36 14 16 65 46 83 24 19 22 24 1 3 6 10 64 60 17 36 66 102 157 34 41 129 43 24 28 36 19 72 54 33 49 94 89 230 59 50 59 31 14 28 23 15 1 437 647 667 913 683 1 182 915 1 131 1 825 3 632 2 807 968 1 633 1 476 1 957 366 167 171 256 189 392 433 290 488 831 759 299 475 485 1 032 697 270 247 471 305 390 130 590 1 039 2 013 1 769 522 837 737 648 63 33 23 52 54 54 12 34 33 29 15 5 15 15 9 262 144 195 104 102 285 282 154 211 648 205 128 263 201 227 112 66 54 82 87 115 70 97 87 140 74 19 58 53 50 a P-30 MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL, MINN., SMSA A.8-6 CENSUS TRACTS Table P-1. General Characteristics of the Population: 1970-Continued [For minimum base for derived figures (percent, median, etc.) and meaning of symbols, see text) Census Tracts RACE AN persons White Negro Percent Negro AGE BY SEX Ma&, d ages Under 5 years 3 and 4 years 5 to 9 years 5 years 6 years 10 to 14 years 14 years 15 to 19 years 15 years 16 years 17 years 18 years 19 years 20 to 24 years 20 years 21 years 25 to 34 years 35 to 44 years 45 to 54 years 55 to 59 years 60 to 64 years 65 to 74 years 75 years and over Female, e8 ages Under 5 years 3 and 4 years 5 to 9 years 5 years 6 years 10 to 14 years 14 years 15 to 19 years 15 years_________. 16 years_- _____________ _____ 17 years 18 years 19 years 20 to 24 yeors 20 yeors 21 yeors---------------- --- 25 to 34 years 35 to 44 years 45 to 54 years__ 55 to 59 years 60 to 64 years 65 to 74 yeors 75 yeors and over RELATIONSHIP TO HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD A11 persons In households Head of household Head of family Primary individual Wife of head Other relative of head Not related to heod In group quarters Persons per household TYPE OF FAMILY AND NUMBER OF OWN CHILDREN AN families With own children under 18 yeors Number of children Nesbed-wlfe fasaes With own children under 18 years Number of children Percent of total under 18 years Families with ether male bed With own children under 18 yeors Number of children Families with bola& Wed With own children under 18 years Number of children Percent of total under 18 yeors Persons under 18 years MARITAL STATUS Ma&, 14 years old and ever Single Morried Separated Widowed Divorced__ Single Married Separated Widowed Divorced Female, 14 years old ad ever St. Paul -Con. Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract 0352 0353 0354 0355 0356 0357 0358 0359 0360 0361 0362 0363 0364 0365 0366 4 644 5 426 3 752 3 359 2 333 3 480 3 755 1 849 2 207 2 300 5 201 4 593 4 888 4 734 4 841 4 581 5 126 2 748 2 983 2 268 3 449 3 560 1 776 2 162 2 210 5 169 4 573 4 881 4 727 4 82: 44 269 840 259 34 1 107 7 8 38 8 12 3 4 0.9 5.0 22.4 7.7 1.5 - 2.8 0.4 0.4 1.7 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 2 073 2 358 1 772 1 567 984 1 577 1 674 877 1 060 1 038 2 398 1 652 2 239 2 150 2 319 198 213 213 133 88 129 138 77 98 119 172 154 191 164 187 84 86 85 45 26 50 47 27 33 49 68 65 82 72 77 232 283 214 116 94 177 82 70 90 162 173 173 210 170 233 39 50 41 25 18 22 17 19 20 26 36 38 40 31 42 49 60 44 30 14 39 14 13 17 31 36 31 33 27 44 217 258 208 86 116 222 84 52 85 155 172 141 211 174 195 41 49 32 16 24 47 15 12 19 24 35 20 50 38 36 177 215 161 98 92 181 131 57 86 119 197 147 200 172 213 39 53 27 12 24 39 21 12 18 33 35 30 33 37 46 28 46 32 22 22 46 15 10 19 24 41 34 42 32 35 36 39 40 14 13 38 20 10 14 20 44 26 42 35 48 32 42 35 29 20 28 31 15 22 23 45 29 40 36 49 42 35 27 21 13 30 44 10 13 19 32 28 43 32 35 204 180 199 156 118 108 234 66 76 65 163 102 147 164 140 50 27 31 20 15 18 49 9 9 10 33 21 38 36 30 50 39 50 29 15 20 35 15 18 14 29 27 29 27 33 277 277 232 212 112 159 266 115 143 86 299 198 256 253 257 196 220 125 162 89 184 168 79 85 88 223 158 221 161 203 180 253 151 169 101 150 180 113 111 74 266 155 215 236 241 103 109 79 92 33 70 83 70 72 30 157 95 131 161 152 94 89 64 90 28 42 84 61 58 35 165 81 119 139 156 124 150 72 136 73 95 136 64 80 71 260 159 203 232 237 71 111 54 117 40 60 88 53 76 34 151 89 135 124 105 2 571 3 068 1 980 1 792 1 349 1 903 2 081 972 1 147 1 262 2 803 2 941 2 649 2 584 2 522 177 205 220 140 65 139 14' 84 100 121 150 130 194 130 156 65 80 90 38 26 72 39 34 30 46 55 52 78 52 58 232 267 231 119 94 176 80 77 84 151 181 156 214 145 175 50 51 48 24 21 37 20 19 24 19 42 20 45 23 29 47 69 47 26 14 30 17 15 9 31 33 39 48 27 41 221 293 190 80 97 214 85 46 76 150 182 167 185 166 190 44 51 34 15 19 52 16 9 15 28 37 35 31 40 36 225 225 197 115 94 171 169 68 99 126 224 498 163 177 176 37 44 37 13 17 40 18 11 12 23 44 36 39 38 33 51 56 35 30 11 38 17 12 19 32 51 30 36 36 43 46 55 41 13 22 45 24 15 28 32 59 30 32 43 28 37 34 33 29 17 24 42 11 19 17 34 185 31 30 31 54 36 51 30 27 24 68 19 21 22 36 217 25 30 41 241 234 204 146 152 140 284 151 129 84 175 435 174 181 172 60 46 43 37 32 18 56 50 20 19 35 178 26 31 31 49 50 47 31 25 31 76 52 33 15 38 149 49 38 36 267 290 230 185 146 187 223 91 101 107 282 221 270 253 256 204 260 153 118 116 201 163 68 88 118 243 201 250 199 204 257 303 182 148 144 167 196 108 111 75 325 243 279 313 315 144 165 67 70 85 105 149 49 69 45 212 132 175 219 191 150 172 90 91 86 88 155 61 63 50 201 150 151 193 214 257 385 118 235 165 183 251 89 120 136 422 315 367 376 307 196 269 98 345 105 132 185 80 107 99 206 293 227 232 166 4 644 5 426 3 752 3 359 2 333 3 480 3 755 1 849 2 207 2 300 5 201 4 593 4 888 4 734 4 641 4 596 5 414 3 670 3 100 2 242 3 480 3 595 1 568 2 073 2 282 5 201 3 621 4 848 4 684 4 841 1 603 1 926 1 179 1 626 927 1 103 1 801 676 812 712 2 012 1 241 1 696 1 797 1 663 1 077 1 258 789 597 494 788 786 349 492 459 1 424 952 1 316 1 307 1 362 526 668 390 1 029 433 315 1 015 327 320 253 588 289 380 490 301 899 1 010 535 419 367 669 592 263 360 330 1 270 827 1 137 1 133 1 204 1 930 2 356 1 811 946 871 1 633 978 592 835 1 203 1 842 1 507 1 949 1 690 1 908 164 122 145 109 77 75 224 37 66 37 77 46 66 64 66 48 12 82 259 91 - 160 281 134 18 - 972 40 50 - 2.87 2.81 3.11 1.91 2.42 3.16 2.00 2.32 2.55 3.21 2.58 2.92 2.86 2.61 2.91 1 077 1 258 789 597 494 788 786 349 492 459 1 424 952 1 316 1 307 1 362 538 608 500 295 236 452 336 198 246 291 581 425 581 499 551 1 462 1 722 1 393 720 651 1 279 687 458 595 965 1 279 1 084 1 398 1 124 1 319 899 1 010 535 419 367 669 592 263 360 330 1 270 827 1 137 1 133 1 204 478 527 330 187 183 406 253 150 165 203 541 395 542 455 508 1 318 1 494 980 500 545 1 173 565 351 430 647 1 204 1 031 1 316 1 035 1 248 87.1 82.5 65.9 64.3 82.2 90.0 77.9 73.7 66.9 63.3 92.3 93.1 92.1 88.5 91.2 30 40 32 27 18 23 35 10 19 18 28 23 32 29 28 5 3 8 8 5 9 6 2 4 6 6 4 5 3 4 15 10 20 22 8 13 8 5 5 21 16 7 11 10 6 148 208 222 151 109 96 159 76 113 111 126 102 147 145 130 55 78 162 100 48 37 77 46 77 82 34 26 34 41 39 129 218 393 198 98 93 114 102 160 297 59 46 71 79 65 8.5 12.0 26.4 25.4 14.8 7.1 15.7 21.4 24.9 29.1 4.5 4.2 5.0 6.8 4.7 1 514 1 812 1 488 778 663 1 303 725 476 643 1 022 1 304 1 107 1 429 1 170 1 369 1 467 1 653 1 169 1 248 710 1 096 1 385 690 806 626 1 916 1 204 1 677 1 680 1 740 476 505 468 412 268 361 513 267 266 209 509 312 440 432 452 923 1 064 596 558 391 685 673 319 413 357 1 293 849 1 167 1 159 1 228 10 22 28 88 16 5 56 35 35 9 4 7 5 8 10 38 47 43 94 26 28 62 41 57 23 67 26 51 53 38 30 37 62 184 25 22 137 63 70 37 47 17 19 36 22 1 985 2 354 1 373 1 468 1 112 1 426 1 791 774 902 868 2 327 2 523 2 087 2 183 2 037 . 644 779 418 422 446 471 686 234 239 224 580 1 408 488 531 .."439 938 1 069 655 509 402 696 667 317 418 387 1 305 852 1 187 1 171 1 224 18 28 80 60 23 12 45 30 39 33 12 9 13 14 8 312 386 182 391 182 195 292 134 166 185 367 218 350 402 310 91 120 118 146 82 64 146 89 79 72 75 45 62 79 64 CENSUS TRACTS A.8-7 MINNEAPOUS-ST. PAUL, MINN., SMSA P-31 Table P-l. General Characteristics of the Population: 1970-Continued [For minimum base for derived figures (percent, median, etc.) and meaning of symbols, see text] Census Tracts RACE Al prN.s White Negro Percent Negro AGE BY SEX M.le, el stet Under 5 years 3 and 4 years 5 to 9 years 5 years 6 years__ _ 10 to 14 yeors 14 years________ 15 to 19 years 15 years 16 years 17 years_ 18 yeors 19 years 20 to 24 years 20 years 21 years 25 to 34 years 35 to 44 years 45 to 54 yeorS 55 to 59 years 60 to 64 years 65 to 74 years 75 years and over Female, el ores Under 5 years 3 and 4 years 5 to 9 years 5 years-'_ _______ ____________ 6 years 10 to 14 years 14 yeors 15 to 19 years 15 years___________ 16 years --------------'-----'---------------- 17 years 18 years---'---'--- _________ 19 years--""------------------------____. 20 to 24 years 20 years 21 years -----------------'--------"---'---- 25to34yeors _________________ 35 to 44 years 45 to 54 years 55 to 59 years 60 to 64 years 65 to 74 years 75 years and over RELATIONSHIP TO HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD A11 'WINK In households Head of household Heod offamily ______ ___________ _______ Pnmory indiv,duol Wife of head Other relative of head Not related to heod In group quarters Persons per household TYPE OF FAMILY AND NUMBER OF OWN CHILDREN AN Wain With own children under 18 years Number of children N.s6aed-wife fondles With own children under 18 years Number of children Percent of total under 18 years Females with NW m.N hoed With own children under 18 years Number of children Nm1Ms IN% f.m.l. M.6 With own children under 18 years Number of children Percent of total under 18 years Persons under 18 years MARITAL STATUS Male, 14 years .N end over Single Married __________ Separated Widowed Divorced NNW', 14 yours .N a.d over Single Married Separated ____________________ Widowed Divorced St. Paul -Con. Balance of Ramsey County Troct Trott Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Troct Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract 0367 0368 0369 0370 0371 0372 0374 0375 0376.01 0376.02 0401 0402 0403.01 0403.02 4 901 3 272 2 897 3 611 4 993 6 335 S 635 6 341 5 245 2 600 2 864 2 240 2 498 7 393 4 958 3 262 2 866 3 574 4 953 6 201 5 579 6 330 5 218 2 491 2 849 2 236 2 469 7 348 2 - 1 4 7 18 22 4 7 75 5 2 2 2 - - - 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.1 2.9 0.2 0.1 0.1 - 2 326 1 541 1 353 1 700 2 242 2 996 2 899 2 925 2 296 1 153 1 408 1 104 1 2S2 3 707 206 132 122 166 233 306 287 144 203 151 142 107 121 477 75 50 39 71 99 114 123 60 81 46 67 44 53 210 195 153 155 178 231 329 360 208 210 92 211 128 151 574 34 30 30 38 43 63 58 43 45 25 34 23 35 119 35 33 35 40 49 63 74 33 37 19 35 23 19 101 252 163 133 178 231 313 368 303 231 47 200 123 166 591 55 37 22 32 40 48 88 70 49 10 38 20 29 101 219 154 123 162 213 280 291 346 239 61 156 133 133 323 47 33 34 32 47 78 86 67 62 12 31 31 31 86 41 32 23 38 38 55 69 82 38 14 37 32 28 80 49 39 19 32 51 52 60 75 54 7 39 23 34 69 48 29 19 30 41 54 43 69 41 12 29 25 26 59 34 21 28 30 36 41 33 53 44 16 20 22 14 29 178 105 98 129 167 242 200 215 160 164 56 83 67 136 33 17 18 27 27 48 29 62 34 10 18 16 15 30 42 21 18 26 31 40 25 51 35 21 8 9 19 18 251 163 142 210 250 379 499 243 287 307 175 120 147 540 213 142 121 152 220 279 396 282 204 75 175 93 150 631 272 186 134 166 214 258 270 492 320 93 142 128 165 307 141 85 88 80 94 146 96 215 130 40 44 60 60 54 126 77 73 88 96 158 58 156 97 49 44 37 40 32 176 114 96 114 146 192 50 195 136 50 38 56 34 25 97 67 68 77 147 114 24 126 79 24 25 36 18 17 2 655 1 731 1 544 1 911 2 751 3 339 2 736 3 416 2 949 1 447 1 456 1 136 1 246 3 686 190 116 121 130 222 296 239 162 203 178 162 105 125 477 83 47 46 61 95 121 97 78 77 63 69 47 49 210 230 158 139 180 201 312 353 220 195 90 203 89 150 581 40 16 26 34 42 54 66 40 34 28 42 18 24 99 56 42 20 34 45 72 81 44 40 19 39 13 28 114 231 192 151 204 207 334 328 314 241 40 219 125 159 527 46 35 33 36 39 73 52 73 57 4 40 22 41 102 242 151 112 175 228 297 197 368 247 72 124 99 113 316 55 37 21 35 49 50 65 53 44 11 29 24 23 75 47 25 21 25 48 62 37 82 56 9 36 21 30 89 46 30 32 37 31 58 39 96 49 10 18 27 22 64 45 33 20 36 55 77 28 75 62 18 25 11 17 44 49 26 18 42 45 50 28 62 36 24 16 16 21 44 193 127 109 149 221 314 251 258 190 308 81 82 69 191 35 31 17 24 44 61 23 53 33 43 20 16 17 29 42 23 16 38 51 55 48 64 26 42 21 14 10 28 233 146 158 214 267 371 486 272 296 271 188 114 145 609 252 154 135 143 213 288 384 361 286 114 169 106 170 606 327 198 173 204 276 334 272 562 355 126 133 134 172 260 160 110 101 116 133 190 74 204 165 71 51 68 48 42 170 80 90 97 128 166 53 183 148 63 41 62 34 24 266 166 139 181 267 266 53 318 337 80 57 84 42 34 161 133 116 118 388 171 46 194 286 34 28 68 19 19 4 981 3 272 2 897 3 611 4 993 6 335 5 635 6 341 5 245 2 600 2 864 2 240 2 498 7 393 4 981 3 218 2 871 3 611 4 642 6 334 5 520 6 263 5 120 2 600 2 864 2 232 2 485 7 377 1 663 1 065 1 018 1 156 1 568 2 019 1 592 2 086 1 859 1 159 713 707 674 1 736 1 272 785 719 927 1 126 1 573 1 348 1 674 1 270 710 647 561 617 1 650 391 280 299 229 442 446 244 412 589 449 66 146 57 86 1 097 633 542 777 907 1 296 1 278 1 530 1 120 562 594 492 581 1 588 2 160 1 470 1 263 1 638 2 112 2 919 2 500 2 556 2 089 796 1 531 1 001 1 215 3 998 61 50 48 40 55 100 150 91 52 83 26 32 15 55 - 54 26 - 351 1 115 78 125 - - 8 13 16 3.00 3.02 2.82 3.12 2.96 3.14 3.47 3.00 2.75 2.24 4.02 3.16 3.69 4.25 1 272 785 719 927 1 126 1 573 1 348 1 674 1 270 710 647 561 617 1 650 609 385 363 469 586 822 838 812 688 392 445 305 401 1 390 1 532 1 046 906 1 199 1 520 2 097 2 150 1 784 1 553 643 1 287 805 1 019 3 632 1 097 633 S42 777 907 1 296 1 278 1 530 1 120 562 594 492 581 1 588 542 327 281 409 496 699 802 762 639 299 412 272 383 1 339 1 400 916 715 1 085 1 320 1 836 2068 1 699 1 457 505 1 201 735 968 3 527 88.1 82.5 73.6 87.9 83.1 81.8 90.3 94.1 91.9 76.4 90.5 88.0 93.1 95,6 40 33 42 28 32 51 16 31 16 16 9 14 8 12 6 3 9 6 5 12 4 7 1 3 4 7 2 10 10 5 23 10 10 37 8 11 1 5 9 12 6 16 135 119 135 122 187 226 54 113 134 132 44 55 28 50 61 55 73 54 85 111 32 43 48 90 29 26 16 41 122 125 168 104 190 224 74 74 95 133 77 58 45 89 7.7 11.3 17.3 8.4 12.0 10.0 3.2 4.1 6.0 20.1 5.8 6.9 4.3 2.4 1 589 1 110 971 1 235 1 589 2 245 2 291 1 806 1 586 661 1 327 835 1 040 3 690 1 728 1 130 965 1 210 1 587 2 096 1 972 2 340 1 701 873 893 766 843 2 166 499 366 297 343 473 604 632 711 488 237 254 235 224 519 1 130 662 573 801 966 1 364 1 294 1 557 1 148 581 609 505 591 1 612 7 13 18 10 18 23 4 7 9 16 8 6 4 5 52 46 48 41 95 62 18 48 44 19 13 15 12 16 47 56 47 25 53 66 28 24 21 36 17 11 16 19 2 050 1 300 1 166 1 433 2 160 2 470 1 868 2 793 2 367 1 143 912 839 853 2 203 498 367 279 355 625 640 435 799 630 307 209 176 190 501 1 165 ' 665 595 813 989 1 383 1 308 1 570 1158 599 615 510 596 1 623 33 17 28 17 33 52 8 16 13 21 9 6 7 13 305 210 213 198 461 333 89 345 492 111 75 119 56 44 82 58 79 67 85 114 36 79 87 126 13 34 11 35 1 1 1 t P-32 MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL, MINN., SMSA A.8-8 CENSUS TRACTS Table P-2. Social Characteristics of the Population: 1970-Continued Mato based on sample, see text. For minimum base for derived figures (percent, median, etc.) and meaning of symbols, see text] 1 Census Tracts NATIVITY, PARENTAGE, & COUNTRY OF ORIGIN AN person Native of notive parentage Native of foreign or mixed parentage Foreign born Fenlp ,sock United Kingdom Ireland (Eire) Sweden Germany Poland Czechoslovakia Austria_____________ _______ Hungary U.S.S.R. Italy Canada Mexico Cuba Other Americo All other and not reported Persons of Spanish language' Other persons of Spanish surname' Persons of Spanish mother tongue Persons of Puerto Rican birth or parentage SCHOOL ENROLLMENT Enrolled person, 3 to 34 years old Nursery school __ Public Kindergarten Public _______ Elementary Public High school Public College Percent enrolled in school by age: 16 and 17 years 18 and 19 years 20 and 21 years 22 to 24 years 25 to 34 years__________________ Percent 16 to 21 years not high school graduates and not enrolled in school YEARS OF SCHOOL COMPLETED Persons, 25 years e1d and over No school years completed_______ Elementary: 1 to 4 years 5 to 7 yeors 8 years High school: 1 to 3 years 4 years College: 1 to 3 years 4 yeors or more__ Median school years completed Percent high school graduates CHILDREN EVER BORN Women, 35 to 44 years old ever married Children ever born____ Per 1,000 women ever married RESIDENCE IN 1965 Persons, 5 years old end ever, 1970' Same house as in 1970 Different house: In central city of this SMSA In other port of this SMSA Outside this SMSA North and West South Abroad____________ MEANS OF TRANSPORTATION AND PLACE OF WORK All workers Private auto: Driver__ Passenger Bus or streetcar _ Subway, elevated troin, or railroad Walked 10 work Worked at home Other _____ Inside SMSA Minneapolis- central business district Remainder of Minneapolis city Remainder of Hennepin County St. Paul -central business district Remainder of St. Paul city Remainder of Ramsey County Anoka County Dakota County Washington County Outside SMSA Place of work not reported 5t. Paul -Con. Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Troct Tract Troct Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract 0320 0321 0322 0323 0324 0325 0326 0327 0328 0329 0330 0331 0332 0333 0334 3 474 3 453 3 072 4 212 2 759 4 221 3 845 2 795 1 999 2 187 1 855 2 461 2 300 4 297 3 010 2 638 2 699 2 316 3 094 2 099 3 117 3 067 2 125 1 374 1 984 1 381 1 948 1700 3 508 2 351 698 658 678 992 589 922 671 561 487 188 379 457 431 666 545 138 96 78 126 71 182 107 109 138 15 95 56 169 123 114 836 754 756 1 118 660 1 104 778 670 625 203 474 513 600 789 659 65 41 66 70 6 79 37 14 22 6 - 28 38 34 21 15 16 60 44 25 23 27 24 7 - 15 17 59 85 44 195 143 157 141 28 106 14 69 89 43 11 69 70 109 145 145 119 151 306 218 282 197 50 103 25 90 153 82 162 143 34 14 7 66 56 60 52 186 7 6 6 20 8 79 12 - 5 14 7 13 9 47 15 16 5 14 13 13 6 6 20 29 17 85 74 76 66 16 51 5 5 - 26 21 7 18 7 5 20 31 32 14 7 10 - 8 - - 6 - - 21 - 20 2 15 8 4 12 - 7 6 - 6 28 31 12 17 33 18 22 6 6 25 - 161 22 - 20 - 130 78 56 69 37 75 38 36 55 41 41 69 65 85 75 5 6 - - 10 5 34 74 46 8 20 14 13 - - - - - - - - - 10 5 14 - 3 31 - - 7 6 - - - - - - - - 20 178 258 192 257 139 289 238 169 165 58 96 102 226 176 158 53 45 25 36 20 89 69 282 102 8 81 49 5 41 - 15 34 8 15 16 20 54 232 34 8 74 28 5 41 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 767 1 390 965 1 131 711 1 016 1 052 726 487 1 009 385 573 469 1 305 1 230 26 11 6 30 16 9 5 - - 9 8 22 23 22 4 18 - - 12 11 - - - - 9 8 17 18 10 - 55 43 72 64 86 54 87 36 13 70 51 42 68 58 - 55 38 67 57 68 46 70 36 13 67 51 34 68 30 433 251 374 570 366 567 58A 488 218 567 202 371 179 652 329 318 190 198 235 189 318 430 331 162 560 179 236 154 329 217 135 162 158 303 155 270 309 169 87 158 104 105 50 393 188 122 102 67 132 117 139 263 131 54 158 90 96 43 156 143 118 923 355 164 88 116 67 33 169 205 20 33 149 180 709 92.7 99.9 99.9 99.9 94.0 97.1 99.9 96.0 86.2 90.9 86.0 62.5 78.6 99.5 99.9 39.2 86.5 79.8 61.5 45.6 51.6 34.6 27.6 24.2 88.1 45.2 21.0 27.9 77.4 92.9 30.3 97.1 56.0 51.9 19.2 37.0 - - 55.8 76.9 11.5 6.6 34.2 24.5 78.4 11.8 38.6 47.9 12.8 16.3 7.6 10.3 7.6 32.0 15.6 12.9 4.4 22.8 18.1 31.7 5.3 20.2 4.5 4.4 5.6 3.3 4.3 4.3 6.2 3.3 - 2.5 10.2 6.0 15.8 9.1 - 2.2 2.9 16.1 5.0 12.5 14.8 5.9 12.5 24.2 24.1 9.9 4.9 4.1 1 974 1 644 1 638 2 423 1 543 2 353 2 02S 1 503 1 126 712 1 003 1 366 1 340 2 300 1 437 17 5 5 18 8 5 7 18 16 - 43 34 6 11 17 18 11 16 16 56 41 34 55 49 36 32 55 19 22 49 118 128 123 162 141 206 263 204 131 128 185 197 77 89 120 377 231 269 465 423 612 481 356 316 167 217 303 227 299 346 322 311 280 404 344 418 443 327 256 164 208 259 220 266 236 813 609 604 1 041 462 879 667 441 259 189 268 362 462 805 445 185 184 171 172 84 146 62 24 57 19 17 99 171 457 124 124 165 170 145 25 46 68 78 42 9 33 57 158 351 100 12.2 12.2 12.2 12.1 10.3 11.2 10.5 10.1 9.6 9.5 9.4 10.1 12.3 12.6 11.4 56.8 58.3 57.7 56.0 37.0 45.5 39.4 36.1 31.8 30.5 31.7 37.9 59.0 70.1 46.6 142 101 81 198 92 174 149 145 71 93 82 100 74 167 63 460 305 258 775 348 557 544 565 234 691 254 444 201 714 226 3 239 3 020 3 185 3 914 3 783 3 201 3 651 3 897 3 296 7 430 3 098 4 440 2 716 4 275 3 587 3 192 3 218 2 827 3 865 2 516 3 809 3 443 2 508 1 947 1 838 1 652 2 269 2 070 3 979 2 839 1 891 1 132 1 680 2 702 1 871 2 235 2 013 1 332 801 551 851 1 084 829 2 128 1 153 765 936 503 734 391 1 162 766 552 500 687 502 686 638 1 112 739 92 221 47 98 71 103 74 174 114 106 85 124 103 97 64 348 659 507 163 117 242 268 256 320 274 110 268 254 359 613 301 633 453 133 117 217 231 234 320 233 91 268 246 318 601 47 26 54 30 - 25 37 22 - 41 19 - 8 41 12 80 32 25 - 9 13 16 35 7 22 25 48 12 64 1 609 1 643 1 288 1 794 1 089 1 721 1 502 938 977 346 608 918 1 049 1 746 1 340 975 765 719 1 093 703 1 013 728 458 216 77 341 406 613 1 066 536 199 206 161 253 235 248 374 152 85 68 97 159 88 314 134 194 182 167 237 98 296 210 153 210 51 146 163 122 210 143 213 - 463 215 - 149 - 28 - 116 - 159 - 156 - 410 - 144 - - 142 - 210 - 129 495 28 20 15 42 6 34 7 - 46 6 6 42 16 21 6 - 7 11 20 19 14 24 19 10 - 18 6 - 6 26 1 519 1 509 1 234 1 709 1 041 1 694 1 425 875 910 314 546 899 922 1 659 1 256 23 - 21 17 - 33 24 - 5 11 - - 36 28 16 101 138 55 173 40 61 93 37 45 13 6 22 109 196 64 48 36 54 47 18 29 33 64 7 - 17 - 54 139 14 203 113 156 208 121 289 179 137 174 35 126 201 65 164 77 983 1 070 837 1 075 710 1 107 998 554 640 241 351 604 566 944 982 116 119 66 135 93 118 66 61 34 7 46 43 71 87 79 30 13 21 7 40 - - - - - 34 - 15 13 5 40 19 38 - 20 - 16 5 - - 6 12 51 18 7 19 7 - 19 12 6 - 7 - 23 9 16 6 5 15 5 9 5 11 20 7 9 5 - - 14 6 7 85 119 49 76 43 16 57 56 58 27 62 19 113 81 77 'See text for definition. 'Includes "Moved, 1965 residence not reported." A.8-9 CENSUS TRACTS MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL, MINN., SMSA P-65 Table P-2. Social Characteristics of the Population: 1970-Continued (Data based on sample, see text. For minimum base for derived figures (percent, median, etc.) and meaning of symbols, see text) Census Tracts NATIVITY, PARENTAGE, & COUNTRY OF ORIGIN All persons Native of native parentage Native of foreign or mixed parentage Foreign born Weis stock United Kingdom Ireland (Eire) Sweden Germany Poland Czechoslovakia Austria __ Hungary U.S.S.R. Italy Canada Mexico CubaOther America All other and not reported Persons of Spanish longuoge' Other persons of Spanish surname' Persons of Spanish mother tongue Persons of Puerto Rican birth or parentage SCHOOL ENROLLMENT brawl pinion, 3 to 34 yews old Nursery school Public _____________ Kindergarten Public Elementary Public High school _____ Public_ -- College Percent enrolled in school by age: 16 and 17 years 18 and 19 years 20 and 21 years __ 22 to 24 yeors 25 to 34 years_________________________________ Percent 16 to 21 yeors not high school groduotes and not enrolled in school YEARS OF SCHOOL COMPLETED ►ars•.s, 25 yers .M ee6 tow No school yeors completed Elementary: 1 to 4 years 5 to 7 years 8 yeors __________________ High school: 1 to 3 years 4 yeors College: 1 to 3 yeors 4 yeors or more Median school years completed Percent high school graduates CHILDREN EVER BORN Weems, 35 t• 44 yews •Id ever worried Children ever born Per 1,000 women ever married RESIDENCE IN 1965 Ponies, 5 years 44.4 ever, 1970,____ _ Same house as in 1970 Different house: In central city of this SMSA In other part of this SMSA______________ Outside this SMSA_____ North and West South Abroad_______ MEANS OF TRANSPORTATION AND PLACE OF WORK AN workers ______________________________ Private auto: Driver Possenger Bus or streetcar Subway, elevated train, or railroad Walked to work Worked of home__________________ Other Inside SMSA Minneapolis -central business district Remainder of Minneapolis city Remainder of Hennepin County St. Paul -central business district Remainder of 5t. Paul city Remainder of Ramsey County Anoka County __ Dakota County Washington County Outside SMSA Place of work not reported St. Poul-Con. Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Troct Troct Troct Troct Tract Tract Tract Tract 0335 0336 0337 0338 0339 0340 0342 0344 0345 0346 0347 0348 0349 0350 0351 3 362 1 779 1 323 2 534 2 111 2 307 2 151 2 964 4 066 8 707 7 547 2 4611 4 519 3 $97 4 326 3 164 1 591 972 2 421 1 913 1 818 1 403 2 389 4 154 6 598 6 370 1 938 3 886 3 414 3 792 187 148 253 70 179 405 605 508 608 1 714 1 023 397 471 407 439 31 40 98 43 19 84 143 67 104 395 154 133 162 76 97 210 111$ 351 113 19$ 419 74$ 575 712 2 109 1 177 530 633 463 S36 8 19 13 7 38 44 110 49 6 33 27 21 9 - 29 11 17 61 35 20 62 78 71 58 87 38 21 16 43 42 25 24 92 81 76 281 180 78 69 21 105 51 51 53 22 13 82 198 138 230 483 178 98 92 82 71 23 9 23 - 30 62 6 9 62 60 34 16 15 7 13 21 - 9 19 7 18 48 13 8 6 3 12 - 19 6 18 39 6 12 31 104 108 6 13 35 7 4 - - - - - 6 12 15 7 12 - - 11 19 34 - 72 - 20 20 6 41 - 17 25 75 29 100 74 - 48 7 5 29 28 - 43 32 71 40 71 143 101 77 39 114 57 15 13 21 - 36 4 28 20 22 24 28 - - - - - - - - - 8 - - - - 10 16 - - - - - - - 18 7 7 75 44 68 32 35 182 132 132 176 622 265 140 183 113 196 41 162 65 46 78 61 44 83 93 33 112 6 39 12 48 28 137 56 10 68 39 44 70 23 33 45 6 32 5 19 1 032 577 250 052 513 307 69 601 1 440 2 402 2 569 $33 1 693 1 521 2 14$ 36 18 17 46 8 - - 27 7 33 32 48 39 85 40 24 14 - 37 3 - - - - 25 9 15 5 43 - 8 13 26 38 12 18 - 67 118 92 99 41 59 52 34 8 13 16 33 12 18 - 67 118 83 70 28 40 52 29 524 317 112 538 340 161 - 417 912 1 359 1 396 284 552 788 478 485 267 56 484 220 129 - 3,2 541 853 833 137 133 334 179 374 205 40 230 134 45 38 138 339 694 748 127 256 253 726 342 196 40 207 75 45 31 120 238 498 536 64 68 119 123 90 24 55 19 83 31 32 64 224 314 333 787 343 1 370 99.9 97.6 73.5 33.3 76.1 28.0 99.9 94.4 89.6 96.1 99.9 96.4 99.9 90.6 97.3 56.2 44.0 18.9 8.4 22.7 33.7 24.2 50.0 68.2 80.8 81.2 76.3 89.0 24.2 - 22.2 - 22.0 9.3 4.3 4.2 28.1 16.9 76.9 55.5 56.6 87.0 7.0 18.8 18.2 16.6 40.4 3.1 12.3 6.7 19.9 54.6 40.9 31.2 59.3 9.8 11.0 7.9 1.7 - 22.3 3.9 2.2 3.0 10.8 8.7 35.4 13.0 13.4 13.7 4.9 6.5 26.1 19.9 27.6 25.4 21.8 9.5 16.7 5.6 2.6 - 6.8 3.7 0.3 1 93$ $44 $34 1 246 1 202 1 527 1 831 1 460 2 403 4 689 3 009 1 4110 2 129 1 134 1 722 28 4 28 21 13 30 23 13 13 62 9 11 6 20 11 106 49 49 41 55 98 53 62 58 84 17 4 15 5 10 177 143 149 114 146 172 223 118 132 348 168 11 31 26 29 306 228 151 166 240 412 341 256 527 1 029 449 116 149 174 142 341 202 111 301 314 300 317 259 504 790 631 87 242 208 204 662 188 175 412 251 318 545 602 893 1 815 1 652 246 682 678 505 211 31 58 141 126 89 184 87 217 452 508 267 440 338 318 107 19 113 50 57 108 145 71 59 309 375 738 564 385 503 12.0 9.1 10.1 11.8 10.4 9.5 11.6 12.0 11.8 12.1 12.4 16.0 12.9 12.7 12.9 50.6 27.5 41.5 48.4 36.1 33.7 47.7 51.8 48.6 52.7 66.6 84.5 79.2 76.4 77.0 212 85 40 13$ 120 93 18 81 236 416 3117 07 10$ 160 11$ 784 418 119 354 421 222 39 350 873 1 436 1 327 282 474 766 516 3 698 4 918 2 975 2 565 3 508 2 387 ... 4 321 3 699 3 452 3 429 3 241 4 389 4 788 4 373 3 153 1 603 1 215 2 200 1 910 2 160 2 151 2 604 4 371 6 046 6 906 2 292 4 171 3 557 4 061 2 018 648 292 1 151 1 157 776 525 1 367 2 857 5 244 4 464 1 345 1 891 2 211 1 664 562 602 615 229 378 514 721 686 825 1 581 1 123 371 1 109 823 563 44 - 34 47 7 158 133 139 128 285 254 83 200 99 215 225 216 144 138 155 219 447 257 158 346 589 370 522 285 767 133 140 135 102 90 175 426 214 136 320 548 329 509 250 691 92 76 9 36 65 44 21 43 22 26 41 41 13 35 76 - 11 6 - 15 20 34 13 7 127 100 57 13 10 49 1 244 450 409 949 676 764 1 038 1 165 1 070 3 362 3 227 1 044 1 067 1 SOS 1 920 702 243 219 474 324 296 104 679 1 067 2 169 2 145 741 985 953 731 218 75 43 141 117 81 53 137 253 569 497 106 305 212 208 223 126 124 256 150 229 202 225 255 483 410 68 278 155 216 - - - 7 - - - - - 11 33 - 98 53 57 139 547 74 212 133 84 34 260 132 726 25 6 - 9 20 19 104 27 41 - 79 74 12 34 25 43 - 5 16 8 - 21 23 42 8 12 21 27 19 11 892 392 405 880 470 584 876 1 097 1 763 3 196 2 944 963 1 642 1 463 1 797 6 6 22 6 15 6 9 48 34 28 37 57 19 57 61 35 29 33 38 98 52 187 279 203 170 103 56 18 4 18 45 28 5 37 41 49 201 75 65 70 122 177 70 76 198 59 109 499 218 293 802 529 116 318 251 178 499 237 229 513 280 339 307 666 1 153 1 817 1 380 380 926 796 1 117 64 31 33 64 34 28 6 58 78 266 366 44 52 102 90 23 - 6 - - - - 22 25 64 8 17 34 6 5 - 20 17 29 13 43 35 91 125 13 37 17 95 4 12 - - - - 13 31 28 88 83 - 7 12 21 - 17 - 8 - 8 27 7 15 20 42 28 32 - 30 352 41 84 61 206 172 135 61 92 146 241 53 193 42 101 'See text for definition. Includes "Moved, 1965 residence' not reported." P-66 MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL, MINN., SMSA A.8-10 CENSUS TRACTS Table P-2. Social Characteristics of the Population: 1970-Continued (Data bosed on sample, see text. For minimum base for derived figures (percent, median, etc.) and meaning of symbols, see text] Census Tracts NATIVITY, PARENTAGE, IL COUNTRY OF ORIGIN AN possum Native of native parentage Native of foreign or mixed parentage Foreign born foreign stock United Kingdom Ireland (Eire) Sweden Germany Poland Czechoslovakia Austria Hungary U.S.S.R. Italy Canada Mexico Cuba Other America All other and not reported Persons of Spanish language, Other persons of Spanish surname, Persons of Spanish mother tongue Persons of Puerto Rican birth or parentage SCHOOL ENROLLMENT CareMd peruses, 3 to 34 yaws *id Nursery school Public Kindergarten Public Elementary __ Public _ High school Public _---'-""'----"'--'-" College Percent enrolled in school by age: 16 and 17 years 18 and 19 years 20 and 21 years 22 to 24 years_____. 25 to 34 years Percent 16 to 21 years not high school graduates and not enrolled in school YEARS OF SCHOOL COMPLETED 25 years eN sad ever No school years completed Elementary: 1 to 4 years 5 to 7 years 8 years High school: 1 to 3 years 4 years College: 1 to 3 years 4 years or more Medion school yeors completed______ Percent high school graduates CHILDREN EVER BORN Weems, 35 1e 44 years old seer married __ Children ever born Per 1,000 women ever married RESIDENCE IN 1965 Psnees, 5 years old and ever, 19702 Same house as in 1970 Different house: In central city of this SMSA In other part of this SMSA Outside this SMSA North and West____________________ South Abroad MEANS OF TRANSPORTATION AND PLACE OF WORK AN workers Private auto: Driver Passenger Bus or streetcar Subway, elevated train, or railroad Walked to work Worked at home Other Inside SMSA________ Minneapolis- central business district Remainder of Minneapolis city Remainder of Hennepin County St. Paul- central business district Remainder of St. Paul city Remainder of Ramsey County Anoka County Dakota County Washington County Outside SMSA Place of work not reported _ St. Paul -Con. Troct Tract Tract Troct Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract 0352 0353 0354 0355 0356 0357 0358 0359 0360 0361 0362 0363 0364 0365 0366 4 644 5 426 3 752 3 359 2 226 3 587 3 755 2 264 1 792 2 202 5 299 4 593 4 888 4 734 4 841 3 571 4 152 3 173 2 584 1 850 3 024 3 015 1 877 1 209 1 577 3 811 3 577 3 514 3 412 3 654 930 1 022 419 615 258 398 607 338 446 528 1 125 814 1 091 1 098 1 041 143 252 160 160 118 165 133 49 137 97 363 202 283 224 146 1 073 1 274 579 775 376 563 740 387 583 625 1 488 1 016 1 374 1 322 1 187 70 112 49 44 7 - 61 6 18 - 56 32 62 66 87 66 88 30 63 40 83 20 9 40 15 108 185 59 49 85 108 202 56 75 22 100 37 51 8 135 70 180 210 95 188 145 94 149 67 168 137 86 112 75 137 174 226 293 177 35 75 27 66 46 - 7 16 20 6 101 29 40 87 32 18 6 5 23 19 5 10 17 34 15 30 26 32 35 62 36 37 11 23 17 7 49 18 14 15 59 45 57 81 69 9 - 8 - 10 - 15 - 10 13 6 55 44 57 44 16 5 - 5 7 12 - 292 - 91 166 86 117 6 36 7 14 4 7 7 32 83 6 19 51 64 30 14 125 82 65 57 16 67 83 17 27 25 21 106 177 50 78 - - 14 8 - - 22 38 18 299 - 18 - - - - - 58 - - - - - - - - - - - 8 - - - 19 - - - - 357 - 447 164 201 144 141 226 106 144 149 511 189 301 322 365 32 7 62 110 13 119 43 230 74 861 20 121 25 27 34 7 7 19 73 13 86 43 153 32 703 14 25 7 14 7 - 7 - - - - 8 86 - - - - - 1 430 1 801 1 171 513 484 1 404 668 646 401 761 1 438 1 657 1 346 1 098 1 279 36 40 30 9 14 35 34 20 - 10 75 33 79 17 28 20 18 26 9 - 5 7 6 - - - 18 19 9 13 88 166 94 30 20 62 36 36 36 45 100 35 83 55 71 88 150 88 30 20 49 29 31 36 45 63 35 76 55 64 685 953 659 311 239 738 247 285 187 470 604 549 651 517 633 340 420 496 294 105 342 112 184 152 384 397 229 360 290 231 286 386 203 114 111 438 198 166 110 203 390 250 328 328 329 187 200 138 100 44 129 103 166 75 171 289 137 266 197 190 335 256 185 49 100 131 153 139 68 33 269 790 205 181 218 79.6 95.8 79.3 70.3 74.7 99.9 99.9 99.9 87.2 73.8 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 56.8 69.2 42.5 18.3 15.4 72.6 38.8 68.7 23.3 55.1 70.4 87.7 67.1 56.0 67.7 69.5 48.3 39.7 8.7 35.2 64.0 16.5 61.3 27.6 - 73.9 81.0 49.6 35.5 59.6 26.7 22.8 21.0 6.3 31.8 26.1 17.5 16.9 9.5 19.6 33.1 52.6 31.8 16.7 37.1 6.5 11.1 10.6 5.8 4.1 8.0 10.2 6.2 12.6 3.7 8.9 9.1 6.0 11.0 3.1 4.7 3.3 15.7 41.8 7.4 13.1 12.1 10.4 21.3 2.6 2.5 1.0 1.9 2 528 2 999 1 738 2 140 1 344 1 792 2 329 1 215 1 166 1 040 3 413 2 489 2 999 3 097 3 023 16 48 36 24 18 5 21 25 58 35 29 5 9 14 19 16 25 24 82 10 21 72 30 81 92 34 5 6 16 23 116 149 158 261 71 64 146 171 145 224 74 67 98 166 114 281 381 278 406 194 126 278 277 293 194 396 289 368 495 368 312 367 345 513 192 121 310 205 251 255 278 248 380 491 369 864 1 129 542 545 387 479 639 367 238 199 1 089 799 976 1 171 1 069 452 444 224 175 256 393 322 65 84 24 639 433 547 391 512 471 456 131 134 216 583 541 75 16 17 874 643 615 353 549 12.6 12.5 12.1 10.7 12.5 13.6 12.5 10.5 9.1 8.9 12.8 12.8 12.7 12.3 12.6 70.7 67.7 51.6 39.9 63.9 81.2 64.5 41.7 29.0 23.1 76.2 75.3 71.3 61.8 70.5 186 198 171 81 80 167 104 66 90 83 252 198 210 166 222 623 720 649 421 336 735 477 205 251 441 752 675 552 449 629 3 349 3 636 3 795 5 198 4 200 4 401 4 587 3 106 2 789 5 313 2 984 3 409 2 629 2 705 2 833 4 274 5 032 3 313 3 088 2 053 3 345 3 462 2 020 1 681 1 961 4 985 4 309 4 503 4 440 4 493 2 356 2 875 1 171 1 1C3 1 055 2 402 1 544 750 886 892 3 327 2 273 2 771 2 884 3 183 883 1 169 1 252 881 421 429 970 671 495 737 761 794 1 039 921 660 286 170 124 174 51 62 219 83 65 71 135 294 218 74 63 478 253 514 515 312 217 554 290 113 140 381 668 289 339 160 415 236 400 478 253 195 499 290 106 47 317 661 281 297 133 63 17 114 37 59 22 55 - 7 93 64 8 42 27 32 45 - 30 33 39 48 29 14 - 37 63 72 - 6 1 924 2 069 1 466 1 123 1 022 1 323 1 723 937 714 574 2 062 2 010 1 943 2 017 1 981 1 145 1 248 698 496 563 880 806 345 313 269 1 465 958 1 237 1 200 1 359 289 258 224 162 133 189 272 133 129 80 188 255 266 295 187 268 373 406 239 239 157 346 181 130 151 234 189 236 305 215 - - - - - - - - - - - - 148 137 96 172 48 63 137 170 103 63 100 466 109 154 87 36 26 19 17 30 29 124 86 19 - 54 129 77 36 109 38 27 23 37 9 5 38 22 20 11 21 13 18 27 24 1 795 1 957 1 292 963 919 1 222 1 596 843 597 499 1 993 1 849 1 899 1 879 1 837 41 50 30 15 26 5 22 6 - 14 40 48 7 29 8 125 186 85 34 83 51 88 42 54 266 126 248 210 96 183 219 139 92 38 61 61 90 19 7 130 89 83 233 73 237 295 195 201 175 254 349 113 150 80 362 190 318 127 344 907 958 666 511 499 740 929 501 345 346 1 024 1 159 1 094 983 1 143 209 164 87 43 55 59 80 45 24 25 107 108 120 180 111 8 14 23 33 17 8 19 14 - - 14 60 - 39 - 54 40 51 27 6 39 39 15 5 19 21 59 29 25 41 31 31 16 7 20 5 9 17 - 8 29 10 - 53 21 6 18 52 5 16 - 14 - 33 4 24 15 23 38 62 123 94 122 155 87 101 113 94 84 71 45 146 21 100 82 ,See text for definition. 'Includes "Moved, 1965 residence not reported." CENSUS TRACTS A.8-11 MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL, MINN., SMSA P - 67 Table P-2. Social Characteristics of the Population: 1970-Continued Moto based on sample, see text. For minimum base for derived figures (percent, median, etc.) and meaning of symbols, see text] Census Tracts NATIVITY, PARENTAGE, $ COUNTRY OF ORIGIN AN Persons Native of native parentage Native of foreign or mixed parentage Foreign born Foroien stock United Kingdom Ireland (Eire) Sweden 6ermony Polond Czechoslovokia Austria Hungary 1.S.S R. Italy Condo Mexico Cuba Cther America All other and not reported Persons of Spanish language' Other persons of Spanish surname' Persons of Spanish mother tongue Persons of Puerto Rican birth or porentage 5t. Paul -Con. Balance of Ramsey County Tract Tract Tract Troct Troct Tract Trott Troct Troct Tract 0367 0368 0369 0370 0371 0372 0374 0375 0376.01 0376.02 Tract Tract Tract Tract 0401 0402 0403.01 0403.02 SCHOOL ENROLLMENT Enrolled persons, 3 to 34 years eN Nursery school Public Kindergarten Public Elementary Public __ High school Public College Percent enrolled in school by age: 16 and 17 years 18 and 19 years _______ ------ ___------------- 20 and 21 years __ 22 to 24 years 25 to 34 yeors Percent 16 to 21 years not high school graduates and not enrolled in school YEARS OF SCHOOL COMPLETED Persons, 25 soon old nod *rot No school years completed Elementary: 1 to 4 years 5 10 7 years 8 yeors -------------------------- - High school: 1 to 3 years 4 years _________----------- College: 1 to 3 years 4 years or more Median school yeors completed Percent high school graduates ____ CHILDREN EVER BORN Wewen, 35 to 44 years oY over worried Children ever born Per 1,000 women ever married RESIDENCE IN 1965 Persons, 5 yeors old sod over, 1970' Same house os in 1970 Different house: In central city of this SMSA In other part of this SMSA Outside this SMSA__ North and West_ South _ Abroad___ MEANS OF TRANSPORTATION AND PLACE OF WORK AB withers Privote auto: Driver Passenger Bus or streetcar Subwoy, elevated train, or railroad Walked to work Worked at home Other -------------"___ Inside SMSA Minneapolis - central business district Remainder of Minneapolis city Remainder of Hennepin County St. Paul -central business district Remainder of St. Paul city Remainder of Ramsey County Anoka County Dakoto County Washington County Outside SMSA _______ Place of work not reported 4 941 3 272 2 897 3 611 4 993 6 335 5 654 6 341 5 245 2 600 3 687 2 508 2 178 2 675 3 883 4 842 4 884 4 121 3 669 2 036 1 037 616 576 830 887 1 320 604 1 731 1 200 436 257 148 143 106 223 173 166 489 376 128 1 294 764 719 936 1 110 1 493 770 2 220 1 576 564 23 32 - 72 56 25 27 118 95 50 22 39 23 31 52 34 15 68 77 17 105 37 43 80 41 77 97 113 90 13 364 122 165 206 341 373 101 220 170 155 56 38 24 20 21 63 38 267 137 30 224 119 141 13 5 51 40 24 58 17 157 138 79 52 83 65 33 73 56 32 - - 20 21 5 29 6 5 31 28 19 77 55 52 7 619 301 55 81 58 57 10 17 27 14 21 29 9 66 21 39 78 81 77 97 206 145 15 - 7 23 75 87 328 6 - - - - - - - - 8 - - - 46 6 18 - - - - 6 - 75 159 107 106 202 250 308 260 485 338 125 13 12 68 184 128 938 84 16 42 50 6 7 31 142 74 756 58 8 42 50 1 390 960 721 975 1 246 1 704 1 956 2 051 1 434 451 28 3 7 23 7 10 57 57 55 23 - - 7 9 - 5 - - 6 14 77 63 62 58 82 133 132 86 48 10 77 63 62 58 65 133 132 51 19 10 752 567 470 566 698 1 046 1 123 894 709 232 340 225 285 295 429 660 966 571 441 162 383 236 142 283 320 518 429 557 406 62 297 199 85 202 226 407 384 399 332 62 150 91 40 45 139 77 215 457 216 124 99.9 76.2 63.5 99.9 90.2 99.9 90.1 93.5 93.1 88.1 64.7 43.5 20.7 52.5 44.0 47.8 74.2 93.9 83.9 37.5 27.8 44.7 21.3 2.7 46.6 23.2 43.7 76.2 17.4 13.3 5.4 11.4 2.2 - 10.1 1.3 5.4 38.8 9.8 4.0 3.8 8.7 6.3 - 2.7 2.7 10.0 4.7 9.0 13.2 3.8 11.0 21.1 7.6 3.2 12.8 5.8 - 5.1 7.9 2 844 1 821 1 633 1 959 2 646 3 311 2 769 3 800 3 129 1 388 24 5 16 41 51 48 - 26 24 - 53 18 67 9 75 113 11 - 61 - 201 172 208 131 181 242 69 44 98 49 577 441 391 356 503 711 147 287 359 165 547 377 368 420 565 671 322 291 342 185 1 045 636 478 749 1 023 1 213 1 017 1 182 1 202 546 265 111 56 165 246 192 447 792 570 255 132 61 49 88 202 121 756 1 178 473 188 12.0 11.2 10.1 12.0 12.0 11.4 12.8 13.3 12.6 12.5 50.7 44.4 35.7 51.1 51.7 46.1 80.2 82.9 71.7 71.3 212 138 136 120 189 226 357 302 266 83 831 578 542 508 765 910 1 193 824 737 176 3 920 4 188 3 985 4 233 4 048 4 027 3 342 2 728 2 771 2 120 4 585 3 024 2 654 3 317 4 538 5 735 5 125 6 035 4 1140 2 258 3 522 1 910 1 672 1 983 2 408 3 311 2 005 3 877 3 096 715 633 786 547 744 1 329 1 407 841 1 139 1 139 506 224 57 226 368 275 376 826 117 50 203 88 123 64 103 177 339 865 676 279 562 84 123 51 97 148 290 738 647 203 508 4 - 13 6 29 49 127 29 76 54 39 13 - 16 11 31 84 35 39 42 2 070 1 234 1 062 1 370 1 823 2 407 2 418 2 720 2 232 1 313 1 404 660 601 856 977 1 405 1 815 2 027 1 564 908 310 258 144 294 372 383 380 370 255 211 226 196 212 158 320 450 85 136 222 90 109 79 82 - 36 - 98 - 77 - 64 100 - 151 - 93 30 7 36 Al 37 60 11 - 21 15 23 19 20 51 37 27 29 11 1 981 1 227 1 004 1 299 1 732 2 289 2 324 2 606 2 079 1 221 - 4 21 - 5 42 102 35 23 162 34 45 31 135 113 94 343 221 185 61 11 39 16 124 43 41 119 284 105 365 256 146 304 209 534 349 383 228 128 1 196 824 669 690 853 1 196 1 288 1 361 1 045 663 125 44 66 75 140 102 350 138 179 67 16 5 8 - 52 7 7 31 7 56 53 27 162 178 257 54 90 67 45 - - - 41 32 99 39 13 5 6 - - 10 - 8 21 39 6 5 83 11 58 61 91 110 73 75 147 87 2 843 2 228 2 365 7 529 2 516 1 851 2 069 6 834 304 353 302 646 23 24 14 49 327 377 316 695 40 25 27 31 6 20 13 28 75 103 37 77 58 50 94 96 37 - 7 51 6 6 10 - - 15 6 26 - 26 - 6 - 12 17 - 13 55 54 53 18 108 - - 8 - - 34 59 91 217 - - - 27 1 052 674 805 2 990 13 26 18 47 8 - 5 14 70 30 77 187 70 30 77 178 627 398 353 1 943 571 344 279 1 759 270 164 280 634 270 151 222 598 72 56 77 179 96.1 99.9 88.2 96.6 58.9 44.6 67.1 41.5 50.8 23.0 69.8 50.4 10.0 14.7 - 7.8 1.9 5.0 7.6 5.2 7.5 6.3 3.3 1 290 1 224 1 294 3 156 3 - 5 - 20 5 61 72 33 20 150 172 63 103 190 188 172 274 538 419 553 1 281 143 184 210 610 205 173 258 863 12.4 12.4 12.7 12.9 68.7 63.2 78.9 87.3 132 70 196 629 515 261 623 1 986 3 902 3 729 3 179 3 157 2 568 2 016 2 124 6 569 1 531 1 073 1 276 3 427 168 93 153 741 571 532 347 1 220 252 216 278 1 058 238 181 267 991 14 35 11 67 7 5 19 10 1 040 821 927 2 577 889 550 680 2 087 103 121 113 363 6 29 29 34 8 - 70 - 46 - 56 20 15 37 12 14 36 22 25 940 799 898 2 498 - - 14 54 96 29 22 142 21 44 32 95 93 122 126 254 319 227 327 939 328 328 368 845 30 - - 31 14 - 9 51 39 49 87 13 - 15 12 87 22 14 67 t 1 1 1 1 'See text for definition. 'Includes "Moved, 1965 residence not reported." P-68 MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL, MINN., SMSA A.8 -12 CENSUS TRACTS 111 Table P-3. Labor Force Characteristics of the Population: 1970-Continued (Data based on sample, see text. For minimum base for derived figures (percent, median, etc.) and meaning of symbols, see text) Census Tracts EMPLOYMENT STATUS Male, 16 years old and over Labor force Percent of total Civilian labor force Employed Unemployed Percent of civilian labor force Not in labor force Inmate of institution Enrolled in school Other under 65 years Other 65 years and over Mole, 16 1e 21 years old Not enrolled in school Not high school graduates Unemployed or not in lobor force Fetal, 16 years ell sad over Labor force ________ Percent of total Civilian labor force Employed Unemployed Percent of civilian labor force Not in labor force Married women, husband present In labor force With own children under 6 years In labor force OCCUPATION Betel employed, 16 years eN and over Professional, technical, and kindred workers Health workers Teachers, elementary and secondary schools Managers and administrators, except farm Salaried Self-employed in retail trade Sales workers Retail trade Clerical and kindred workers Craftsmen, foremen, ono kindred workers Construction craftsmen Mechanics and repairmen Operatives, except transport Transport equipment operatives Laborers, except farm Form workers Service workers, Cleaning and food service workers Protective service workers Personal and health service workers Private household workers Female employed, 16 years old and over Professional, technical, and kindred workers Teachers, elementary and secondary schools Managers and administrators, except farm Soles workers Clerical and kindred workers Secretaries, stenographers, and typists Operotives, including transport Other blue-collar workers Form workers Service workers, except private household Private household workers INDUSTRY Teel employed, 16 years eM eed over Construction Manufacturing Durable goods Transportation Communications, utilities, and sanitary services Wholesale trade__ Retail trade Finance, insurance, and real estate Business and repair services Personal services Health services Educational services Other professional and related services Public administration Other industries CLASS OF WORKER Total employed, 16 years old sad over Private wage and salary workers Government workers Local government workers Self-employed workers Unpaid family workers St. Poul-Con. Tract Tract Tract Tract Troct Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract 0320 0321 0322 0323 0324 0325 0326 0327 0328 0329 0330 0331 0332 0333 0334 1 198 1 207 1 034 1 446 858 1 442 1 166 922 655 307 518 782 835 1 321 995 974 874 751 1 113 676 1 129 884 657 443 150 337 595 693 998 658 81.3 72.4 72.6 77.0 76.1 78.3 75.8 71.3 67.6 48.9 65.1 76.1 83.0 75.5 66.1 974 874 751 1 113 676 1 129 884 657 443 150 337 595 693 993 658 951 822 736 1 095 667 1 077 837 591 421 138 320 557 661 979 614 23 52 15 18 9 52 47 66 22 12 17 38 32 14 44 2.4 5.9 2.0 1.6 1.3 4.6 5.3 10.0 5.0 8.0 5.0 6.4 4.6 1.4 6.7 224 333 283 333 212 313 282 265 212 157 181 187 142 323 337 - - - - - - 48 22 - 52 7 8 48 49 197 79 62 45 75 55 28 34 21 31 13 29 112 149 51 15 52 69 58 58 80 98 64 51 48 52 27 74 26 124 121 152 202 109 180 147 139 66 63 102 70 79 129 114 151 379 186 257 118 215 169 120 138 48 55 129 134 233 334 50 20 40 54 60 73 63 67 93 7 19 99 74 44 31 15 5 10 27 17 19 28 9 7 6 52 17 5 14 4 5 4 - 12 10 12 - 7 6 19 - - 9 1 395 1 609 1 254 1 642 1 066 1 611 1 467 999 1 021 804 765 1 092 972 1 721 1 486 717 848 612 830 481 710 771 437 563 277 303 526 512 863 826 51.4 52.7 48.8 50.5 45.1 44.1 52.6 43.7 55.1 34.5 39.6 48.2 52.7 50.1 55.6 717 848 612 830 481 710 771 437 563 277 303 526 512 863 826 702 803 612 790 461 686 735 412 536 265 269 473 496 833 802 15 45 - 40 20 24 36 25 27 12 34 53 16 30 24 2.1 5.3 4.8 4.2 3.4 4.7 5.7 4.8 4.3 11.2 10.1 3.1 3.5 2.9 678 761 642 812 585 901 696 562 458 527 462 566 460 858 660 855 523 657 892 653 921 694 541 259 156 296 399 431 762 457 390 256 260 403 244 376 306 195 159 18 139 161 233 355 268 251 169 206 258 204 277 182 155 43 109 77 143 167 230 124 72 80 54 100 49 95 7P 54 22 13 39 54 78 80 45 1 653 1 625 1 348 1 885 1 128 1 763 1 572 1 003 957 403 589 1 030 1 157 1 812 1 416 254 269 197 263 119 121 116 41 87 77 34 98 170 336 212 55 49 51 41 - 39 22 - 36 45 14 5 6 48 42 36 31 38 48 - 15 53 10 - 16 - 27 21 45 23 71 57 79 60 34 70 84 32 31 5 9 29 37 103 18 53 38 70 60 18 46 71 32 26 5 9 15 37 79 13 13 6 5 16 5 10 - - - - 9 - 5 - 75 107 99 115 59 118 42 45 21 4 29 38 80 126 71 44 64 45 105 59 95 20 23 8 4 - 14 36 69 68 393 476 331 524 266 380 312 266 146 68 126 222 319 493 343 240 158 187 263 180 241 196 136 69 22 109 146 92 210 105 39 38 47 70 33 30 26 33 12 3 21 27 16 52 11 53 37 60 36 30 43 60 24 8 4 39 30 42 66 21 210 115 112 221 198 371 345 189 161 36 120 247 188 203 176 124 78 62 79 45 78 69 65 34 13 20 25 26 62 41 62 50 64 86 40 133 113 35 34 24 43 53 74 47 66 10 - 7 - 10 5 - - - - - - 15 224 278 204 244 187 219 263 175 364 145 93 156 156 - 229 352 113 204 112 129 87 131 180 131 127 53 48 91 67 154 214 11 - 12 36 23 10 4 - 7 - 13 20 4 11 11 95 51 75 66 65 78 72 30 122 87 32 42 49 59 97 - 27 13 23 22 27 19 10 9 6 16 15 3 17 702 803 612 790 461 686 735 412 536 265 269 473 496 833 802 97 101 99 107 27 69 74 17 40 51 20 47 54 130 122 28 18 31 31 - 8 47 6 - 10 - 27 5 20 18 - 12 13 9 6 16 31 5 14 5 10 17 14 50 75 55 58 42 47 23 31 12 21 4 30 49 51 296 370 249 341 211 256 248 172 115 62 112 175 252 403 307 92 134 75 104 54 82 95 59 28 16 35 69 70 111 101 112 27 54 83 52 143 148 87 85 24 45 108 37 82 58 37 5 22 36 20 21 40 13 11 - 9 22 8 14 16 110 - 186 - 107 133 103 112 144 68 249 114 56 91 89 138 - 226 - 27 13 23 22 27 19 10 9 6 16 9 3 17 1 653 1 625 1 348 1 885 1 128 1 763 1 572 1 003 957 403 589 1 030 1 157 1 812 1 416 45 79 86 90 83 81 32 52 21 7 30 67 44 47 14 499 249 239 403 386 608 543 349 198 55 236 442 322 415 251 328 167 89 209 243 292 292 218 106 35 138 147 195 271 159 114 103 69 141 60 115 101 55 51 6 48 19 70 140 88 29 20 43 30 21 37 17 17 29 17 17 15 6 36 24 119 73 70 106 57 75 86 22 36 4 8 35 74 85 17 237 312 237 417 196 304 198 120 97 46 44 99 152 325 287 103 58 94 96 37 118 80 65 40 11 20 43 88 150 43 35 60 49 30 30 40 39 10 33 17 10 54 70 104 45 42 62 22 46 32 65 68 52 107 9 26 47 21 28 59 145 124 171 139 79 122 169 73 178 153 50 67 110 103 184 112 336 130 120 57 44 88 63 5 41 15 52 90 138 263 79 81 64 53 27 20 50 44 98 20 43 20 33 132 65 89 52 70 172 57 120 82 76 55 11 42 65 66 79 41 5 16 4 42 6 14 19 5 9 6 - 5 11 30 35 1 653 1 625 1 348 1 885 1 128 1 763 1 572 1 003 957 403 589 1 030 1 157 1 812 1 416 1 343 1 350 1 107 1 530 903 1 504 1 381 795 833 214 487 867 982 1 487 1 263 ' 243 172 185 333 160 215 155 181 105 189 96 109 162 225 131 81 92 61 152 72 75 66 57 28 179 61 46 47 105 39 60 93 56 22 65 44 36 27 19 - 6 49 13 90 17 7 10 - - - - - - - - - 5 - 10 5 lincludes allocated cases, not shown separately CENSUS TRACTS A.8 13 MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL, MINN., SMSA P-101 Table P-3. Labor Force Characteristics of the Population: 1970-Continued Moto based on sample, see text. For minimum base for derived figures (percent, median, etc.) and meaning of symbols, see text] Census Tracts EMPIOYMENT STATUS Mele, 16 years eld sad ever_________________ Labor force Percent of total Civilian lobor force Employed Unemployed Percent of civilian labor force Not in labor force Inmote of institution Enrolled in school Other under 65 years Other 65 years and over Male, 16 to 21 yews old Not enrolled in school Not high school graduates Unemployed or not in labor force !mole, 16 yoen old sod arm labor force Percent of total Civilian labor force Employed Unemployed Percent of civilian labor force Not in lobor force Morried women, husband present In labor force With own children under 6 years In lobar force__ _.. OCCUPATION Total employed, 16 years eW sad over Professional, technical, and kindred workers Health workers Teachers, elementary and secondary schools Managers and administrators, except form Salaried Self-employed in retail trade____ Soles workers Retail trade __ Clericol and kindred workers Craftsmen, foremen, and kindred workers Construction craftsmen Mechanics and repairmen Operatives, except transport Transport equipment operatives ____________________ Laborers, except farm Form workers Service workers' ____ Cleaning and food service workers Protective service workers Personal and health service workers Private household workers hmek employed, 16 years eN sad ever________ Professional, technical, and kindred workers __________ Teachers. elementary and secondory schools Managers and administrators, except form Sales workers Clericol and kindred workers Secretaries, stenographers, and typists Operatives, including transport Other blue.collar workers Form workers Service workers, except private household Private household workers INDUSTRY Total employed, 16 veers eN ed ever Construction Manufacturing Durable goods____________________ Transportation Communications, utilities, and sanitary services _______ Wholesale trade Retail trode Finance, insurance, and real estate Business and repair services Personal services Health services ______ Educational services Other professional and related services Public odministrotion Other industries CLASS OF WORKER Tetsl employed, 16 years sM ed ever Privote wage and salary workers Government workers Local government workers Self.employed workers __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ _ __ Unpaid family workers 5t. Paul - Con. Tract Tract Tract Troct Troct Troct Tract Tract Troct Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract 0335 0336 0337 0338 0339 0340 0342 0344 0345 0346 0347 0348 0349 0350 0351 1 072 535 413 720 770 802 1 186 959 1 450 2 766 2 411 1 011 1 800 1 146 1 S49 787 315 292 559 534 500 736 777 1 096 2 137 2 122 751 1 129 924 1 086 73.4 58.9 70.7 77.6 69.4 62.3 62.1 81.0 75.6 77.3 88.0 74.3 62.7 80.6 70.1 778 315 279 559 534 494 736 777 1 096 2 133 2 122 751 1 129 918 1 078, 728 299 269 501 456 416 651 744 1 045 2 077 2 034 735 1 114 904 1 045 50 16 10 58 78 78 85 33 51 56 88 16 15 14 33 6.4 5.1 3.6 10.4 14.6 15.8 11.5 4.2 4.7 2.6 4.1 2.1 1.3 1.5 3.1 285 220 121 161 236 302 450 182 354 629 289 260 671 222 463 - 33 - - 54 95 11 - 110 - 97 33 17 6 9 34 - 14 71 103 88 157 535 - 75 - 327 46 102 15 73 112 99 126 35 85 121 61 21 53 30 36 142 85 56 82 115 115 229 122 198 295 140 82 83 117 100 207 131 34 114 84 62 76 100 246 412 419 173 787 217 742 54 46 21 60 45 29 70 68 124 113 110 11 111 36 56 12 5 13 12 20 17 31 12 45 16 11 - 65 8 12 - 5 8 5 6 25 12 22 6 6 - 20 - 1 351 642 606 822 679 1 128 927 1 088 1 722 3 468 2 634 897 1 662 1 404 1 888 611 235 235 427 301 485 460 504 885 1 498 1 287 371 897 725 955 45.2 36.6 38.8 51.9 44.3 43.0 49.6 46.3 51.4 43.2 48.9 41.4 54.0 51.6 50.6 611 235 235 427 301 485 460 504 885 1 498 1 287 371 897 725 955 572 208 210 418 280 419 451 478 857 1 449 1 232 371 861 686 942 39 27 25 9 21 66 9 26 28 49 55 - 36 39 13 6.4 11.5 10.6 2.1 7,0 13.6 2.0 5.2 3.2 3.3 4.3 - 4.0 5.4 1.4 740 407 371 395 378 643 467 584 837 1 970 1 347 526 765 679 933 578 201 200 370 243 282 88 559 969 1 885 1 738 535 815 702 598 290 77 85 196 122 111 46 180 483 831 739 174 419 322 226 107 69 46 110 79 54 5 249 284 476 499 134 298 251 170 40 42 7 62 49 6 5 42 119 150 151 23 107 82 38 1 300 507 479 919 736 835 1 102 1 222 1 902 3 526 3 266 1 106 1 975 1 590 1 987 123 29 134 67 80 65 131 106 151 458 550 504 470 420 548 16 7 18 19 6 - 50 21 16 57 53 116 47 77 76 26 10 8 6 5 14 10 5 28 69 63 44 95 47 69 75 - 11 81 12 53 77 41 51 181 246 78 206 99 196 66 - 11 57 12 48 71 36 36 162 227 78 180 88 175 9 - - 20 - - 6 - 9 10 11 - 10 11 16 22 35 9 33 30 37 30 85 51 178 179 105 230 112 137 22 17 9 33 30 12 19 34 35 132 104 29 116 67 69 280 80 79 215 85 229 297 265 546 898 778 176 422 442 521 70 48 18 97 122 33 101 115 279 469 503 51 132 125 111 4 13 6 20 23 11 24 33 69 86 114 5 20 21 25 13 6 7 15 - 17 6 16 33 92 89 - 51 17 19 270 132 92 126 202 137 59 280 330 448 327 31 145 106 87 25 23 26 17 25 27 44 81 72 172 116 5 51 50 35 116 48 17 49 43 92 72 104 111 139 141 IS 64 32 74 - - - - - - - 5 - - - 15 - - 312 103 93 205 114 147 291 132 299 579 419 115 255 194 263 183 85 65 118 65 55 172 71 187 308 241 73 92 148 162 11 - 22 6 5 9 6 32 69 52 10 6 - 27 95 18 6 35 43 54 46 38 69 137 112 24 131 41 53 7 9 - 29 23 15 - 8 12 4 7 11 - 10 15 572 208 210 418 280 419 451 478 857 1 449 1 232 371 861 686 942 68 20 47 12 15 31 75 40 88 178 158 149 184 133 262 20 10 4 6 - 14 10 - 23 49 39 29 70 15 59 16 7 21 12 11 24 5 - 10 48 5 37 14 52 12 11 9 23 30 26 19 25 16 92 75 24 93 36 76 170 74 50 174 70 183 210 196 406 667 536 109 339 318 376 73 4 26 23 28 47 51 71 118 230 213 25 156 118 163 113 52 32 35 57 57 34 92 153 156 125 10 41 57 24 41 16 - 13 18 6 9 18 35 52 38 - 5 8 19 - 5 - _ _ _ _ 145 - 26 65 - 118 55 - 90 - 80 89 147 290 245 63 162 110 118 7 9 - 22 23 15 - 8 12 4 7 11 - 10 15 1 300 507 479 919 736 835 1 102 1 222 1 902 3 526 3 266 1 106 1 975 1 590 1 987 43 40 30 29 87 32 53 42 173 132 139 10 64 49 84 372 118 110 262 242 205 151 396 581 1 152 1 093 176 320 292 179 227 82 42 119 106 128 76 160 246 403 392 89 146 118 63 97 50 22 70 40 27 92 73 161 276 193 66 104 79 70 47 5 14 17 15 24 25 40 34 105 73 20 42 19 27 26 63 18 6 60 41 103 73 147 90 52 124 95 48 168 61 49 108 66 115 165 133 198 488 515 107 297 261 351 27 14 24 69 5 80 114 87 80 155 262 90 159 135 137 24 19 4 28 15 18 45 32 100 102 77 9 44 77 63 45 22 33 75 71 35 106 55 51 116 106 16 53 57 52 136 44 41 72 44 61 92 100 158 283 189 116 214 131 124 87 22 38 18 37 89 40 25 66 183 146 205 291 200 652 128 19 42 38 67 38 93 40 71 104 125 161 159 86 149 95 24 48 123 47 42 80 66 136 247 254 53 89 78 40 5 6 6 4 - 9 5 30 20 36 4 25 15 31 11 1 300 507 479 919 736 835 1 102 1 222 1 902 3 526 3 266 1 106 1 975 1 590 1 987 965 401 334 659 619 668 948 1 021 1 506 2 875 2 618 776 1 545 1 305 1 700 295 83 122 204 99 162 138 155 322 548 487 244 328 194 216 139 40 22 43 23 67 39 53 157 311 234 96 164 86 119 35 23 23 51 18 5 16 42 74 87 151 76 97 91 66 5 - - 5 - - - 4 - 16 10 10 5 - 5 ,Includes allocated cases, not shown separately P-102 MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL, MINN., SMSA A.8 -14 CENSUS TRACTS Table P-3. Labor Force Characteristics of the Population: 1970-Continued [Data based on sample, see text. For minimum base for derived figures (percent, median, etc.) and meaning of symbols, see text] Census Tracts EMPLOYMENT STATUS Melo, 16 yews old sad ever Lobor force Percent of total Civilian labor force Employed Unemployed Percent of civilian labor force Not in labor force Inmate of institution Enrolled in school Other under 65 years Other 65 years and over Male, 16 to 21 yews old Not enrolled in school Not high school graduates Unemployed or not in lobor force kook, 16 yews eM ead woe Labor force Percent of total Civilian labor force Employed Unemployed Percent of civilian labor force Not in labor force __ Married women, husband present In labor force____________ With own children under 6 years In labor force OCCUPATION Total employed. 16 years old mil over Profession], technical, and kindred workers Health workers Teachers, elementary and secondary schools Monogers and odministrotors, except form Soloried Self-employed in recoil trade Sales workers __________________________ Retail trade Clerical and kindred workers Croftsmen, foremen, and kindred workers Cc nstruction craftsmen Mechanics and repoirmen Operatives, except transport Transport equipment operatives Laborers, except farm Form workers Service workers, Cleaning and food service workers _ Protective service workers __ Personal and health service workers Private household workers Female employed, 16 yews Old sod over _ _ _ _ _ _ Professional, technical. and kindred workers Teachers, elementary and secondary schools Managers and odministrotors, except farm Saks workers Ckricol and kindred workers Secretaries. stenographers, and typists Operatives, including transport Other blue-collar workers Form workers Service workers, except private household Private household workers _ INDUSTRY Tenl employed, 16 yews o16 earl ever Construction Manufacturing Durable goods Transportation Communications, utilities, and sanitary services Wholesale trade Retoil trade Finonce, insuronce, and real estate Business and repoir services Personal services Health services Educational services Other professional and related services Public administration Other industries CLASS OF WORKER Total employed, 16 years oM ed nor _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ Private wage and salary workers Government workers Local government workers Self-employed workers Unpaid family workers St. Paul -Con. Tract Tract Troct Troct Tract Tract Troct Troct Tract Tract Tract Tract Trott Tract Troct 0352 0353 0354 0355 0356 0357 0358 0359 0360 0361 0362 0363 0364 0365 0366 1 406 1 511 1 099 1 206 689 980 1 363 746 672 563 1 862 1 139 1 613 1 608 1 653 1 096 1 132 874 787 526 757 1 024 534 442 407 1 388 902 1 187 1 216 1 347 78.0 74.9 79.5 65.3 76.3 77.2 75.1 71.6 65.8 72.3 74.5 79.2 73.6 75.6 81.5 1 086 1 132 874 787 526 757 1 017 534 442 402 1 378 902 1 187 1 202 1 347 1 060 1 109 859 732 496 728 982 510 412 353 1 353 880 1 124 1 165 1 305 26 23 15 55 30 29 35 24 30 49 25 22 63 37 42 2.4 2.0 1.7 7,0 5.7 3.8 3.4 4.5 6.8 12.2 1.8 2.4 5.3 3.1 3.1 310 379 225 419 163 223 339 212 230 156 474 237 426 392 306 - 13 32 11 97 40 - 6 - - 113 103 59 44 51 - 102 53 25 16 24 133 57 106 57 86 36 80 55 157 33 21 125 24 71 38 58 9 57 77 19 161 196 98 186 79 100 150 66 103 94 283 171 257 258 201 255 230 173 99 122 175 192 92 104 113 231 165 272 213 223 69 48 71 51 50 22 113 27 32 57 32 31 58 56 26 10 11 22 30 10 - 37 6 24 12 11 - - - 5 5 11 19 5 26 - - 9 7 - - _ 1 900 2 219 1 307 1 432 1 073 1 304 1 721 833 792 793 2 234 2 445 2 006 2 113 1 993 923 1 069 735 466 592 621 868 404 402 236 833 1 236 833 963 772 48.6 48.2 56.2 32.5 55.2 47.6 50.4 48.5 50.8 29.8 37.3 50.6 41.5 45.6 38.7 923 1 069 735 466 592 621 868 404 402 236 833 1 231 833 963 772 872 1 059 700 452 588 616 832 401 387 217 793 1 212 812 942 746 51 10 35 14 4 5 36 3 15 19 40 19 21 21 26 5.5 0.9 4.8 3.0 0.7 0.8 4.1 0.7 3.7 8.1 4.8 1.5 2.5 2.2 3.4 977 1 150 572 966 481 683 853 429 390 557 1 401 1 209 1 173 1 150 1 221 908 939 549 411 359 657 594 300 354 346 1 265 799 1 086 1 122 1 231 380 389 329 150 171 268 249 123 142 103 365 286 380 458 375 267 282 194 163 88 198 181 127 82 127 267 203 276 191 267 73 84 118 82 16 47 71 51 34 20 58 60 68 64 46 1 932 2 168 1 559 1 184 1 084 1 344 1 814 911 799 570 2 146 2 092 1 936 2 107 2 051 498 446 157 137 186 424 374 65 60 33 544 548 451 397 405 79 72 9 27 18 53 54 16 10 8 96 100 99 71 113 100 61 17 17 38 44 54 4 - 12 63 109 72 104 40 153 163 110 55 99 137 195 69 36 10 388 152 235 204 265 139 133 99 41 86 118 166 53 17 5 350 132 204 185 231 4 20 5 - 9 13 7 11 19 5 11 10 16 9 11 159 193 49 107 114 113 135 28 67 20 269 187 217 176 194 118 106 31 52 91 44 59 19 30 14 96 139 112 88 97 531 571 341 230 340 354 393 153 138 101 514 542 470 551 482 214 250 169 128 64 80 174 120 86 76 134 125 169 217 235 29 45 52 27 14 30 29 25 23 21 21 3 27 51 88 67 46 16 24 10 4 52 26 12 15 13 22 45 40 45 95 172 207 159 90 39 145 137 136 148 90 114 96 128 157 37 29 61 54 37 16 58 20 54 23 23 24 49 63 66 47 76 102 80 25 33 63 65 62 56 43 48 45 62 40 6 - 5 - - _ 187 253 - 331 - 228 - 119 - 137 - 214 - 244 155 - 103 127 317 175 - 304 182 99 156 180 113 74 38 135 118 100 64 57 193 88 150 106 10 17 9 10 10 9 10 8 - 5 6 24 13 47 25 65 74 113 79 26 55 58 96 44 29 64 86 74 88 47 5 15 32 6 10 11 63 10 5 - 9 35 29 5 25 872 1 059 700 452 588 616 832 401 307 217 793 1 212 812 942 746 230 211 68 68 84 133 139 15 15 21 198 286 193 205 122 81 41 13 17 27 23 19 4 - 12 44 88 46 77 21 19 50 25 20 36 20 42 12 14 5 42 14 42 48 36 65 100 34 48 67 71 39 14 47 5 80 91 79 66 68 407 457 245 150 275 261 338 108 113 79 369 477 334 413 321 122 158 42 37 74 99 93 25 30 10 161 170 119 192 100 38 72 99 29 40 34 78 47 53 47 31 48 25 42 77 14 26 8 21 28 4 5 28 15 - 10 24 3 6 13 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 94 128 189 110 48 82 136 167 125 60 54 237 107 157 84 5 15 32 6 10 11 55 10 5 - 9 35 29 5 25 1 932 2 168 1 559 1 184 1 084 1 344 1 814 911 799 570 2 146 2 092 1 936 2 107 2 051 59 71 86 62 55 66 65 35 24 33 67 34 67 115 136 346 434 411 275 157 205 294 229 195 205 378 335 364 411 446 189 166 200 145 64 65 143 112 101 106 210 188 183 195 173 107 88 70 84 54 52 124 47 35 39 97 54 115 162 75 49 52 40 34 22 27 13 27 22 14 45 22 43 46 42 105 143 42 44 22 35 43 42 29 11 171 93 99 105 102 323 389 213 207 186 165 227 122 148 75 358 365 358 393 392 143 169 97 96 110 121 221 37 54 14 222 107 194 128 146 64 59 33 19 61 50 60 44 30 18 57 52 83 34 72 31 69 105 42 37 52 153 61 44 22 50 47 99 62 70 166 187 142 104 64 134 134 122 106 61 177 177 140 153 154 253 215 60 54 112 133 136 37 29 43 200 516 144 215 127 92 118 95 73 100 163 176 67 20 16 182• 165 78 119 112 145 155 137 73 70 122 141 41 33 19 123 95 140 137 149 49 19 28 17 34 19 27 - 30 - 19 30 12 27 28 1 932 2 168 1 559 1 184 1 0114 1 344 1 814 911 799 570 2 146 2 092 1 936 2 107 2 051 1 454 1 737 1 185 943 835 991 1 414 750 672 445 1 654 1 739 1 461 1 667 1 500 371 347 314 175 212 269 287 122 90 97 302 261 315 379 339 • 165 174 125 79 70 128 138 34 35 52 112 123 149 217 148 99 84 55 62 37 84 101 34 37 28 184 77 154 57 203 8 - 5 4 - - 12 5 - - 6 15 6 4 9 'Includes allocated cases, not shown separately CENSUS TRACTS A.8 - i5 MINNEAPOUS-ST. PAUL, MINN., SMSA P -103 Table P-3. Labor Force Characteristics of the Population: 1970-Continued [Data based on somple, see text. for minimum base for derived figures (percent, median, etc.) and meaning of symbols, see text] Census Tracts EMPLOYMENT STATUS Mole, 16 veers eN sod .eM Labor force Percent of total Civilian labor force Employed Unemployed Percent of civilian labor force Not in labor force Inmate of institution Enrolled in school Other under 65 years Other 65 years and over Melo, 16 to 21 years el4 ___________________ Not enrolled in school Not high school graduates Unemployed or not in labor force Forme, 14 y..rs al .d ever Labor force Percent of total Civilian lobor force _________ Employed Unemployed Percent of civilian labor force Not in labor force Married women, husband present In labor force With own children under 6 years In labor force OCCUPATION St. Paul -Con. Bolonce of Ramsey County Tract Tract Troct Troct Troct Troct Tract Troct Troct Troct 0367 0368 0369 0370 0371 0372 0374 0375 0376.01 0376.02 Tract Tract Troct Troct 0401 0402 0403.01 0403.02 Teel employed, 16 year* .l4 .d ever _________ Professional, technical, and kindred workers Health workers Teachers, elementary and secondary schools Managers and administrators, except farm Salaried Self.employed in retail trade Sales workers Retail trade ---------- ________------ Clerical and kindred workers Craftsmen, foremen, and kindred workers Construction ;.raftsmen Mechanics and repairmen________________________ Operatives, except transport _____ Transport equipment operatives Laborers, except form Form workers Service workers' Cleaning and food service workers Protective service workers Personal and health service workers Private household workers ______ __ Few.le employed, 16 veers .M eed ever Professional, technical, and kindred workers Teochers, elementary and secondary schools Managers and administrators, except form Saks workers Clerical and kindred workers Secretaries, stenographers, and typists _ _ Operatives, including transport Other blue-collar workers Farm workers Service workers, except private household Privote household workers INDUSTRY Total employed, 16 yaws Al mil over Construction ___________ Manufacturing Duroble goods ___ Transportation Communications, utilities, and sanitary services Wholesale trade Retail trode Finance, insurance, and real estate Business and repair services Personol services Heolth services Educotionol services Other professional and related services Public odministration Other industries CLASS OF WORKER T.t l e.yleyd, 16 veers eN mod ever Private wage and salary workers Government workers Local government workers Self-employed workers Unpaid family workers 1 624 1 026 925 1 150 1 500 1 954 1 780 2 218 1 595 856 1 272 775 675 860 1 102 1 502 1 580 1 758 1 350 722 78.3 75.5 73.0 74 8 73.5 76.9 88.8 79.3 84.6 84.3 1 272 775 661 860 1 102 1 491 1 570 1 753 1 346 692 1 244 741 641 841 1 069 1 434 1 555 1 741 1 300 681 28 34 20 19 33 57 15 12 46 11 2.2 4.4 3.0 2.2 3.0 3.8 1.0 0.7 3.4 1.6 352 251 250 290 398 452 200 460 245 134 - Id 56 - 27 11 5 - 81 63 22 94 88 79 71 241 49 49 48 46 73 41 68 97 42 54 55 24 223 142 141 155 186 276 60 154 136 61 253 147 135 179 20$ 251 239 401 225 96 64 50 85 53 36 95 55 48 93 52 9 16 31 12 - 42 25 - 13 5 4 11 8 12 - 5 12 - 13 - 1 992 1 234 1 115 1 363 2 074 2 378 1 756 2 650 2 281 1 140 888 567 498 668 838 1 107 893 1 109 1 055 732 44.6 45.9 44.7 49.0 40.4 46.6 50.9 41.8 46.3 64.2 888 567 498 668 831 1 107 893 1 109 1 055 732 863 551 486 646 828 1 049 888 1 093 1 034 726 25 16 12 22 3 58 5 16 21 6 2.8 2.8 24 3.3 0.4 5.2 0.6 1.4 2.0 0.8 1 104 667 617 695 1 236 1 271 863 1 541 1 226 408 1 107 642 557 789 888 1 335 1 261 1 545 1 157 563 425 246 214 314 388 531 548 499 469 254 277 157 134 249 307 425 466 241 296 238 93 48 39 62 99 147 98 45 81 81 2 107 1 292 1 127 1 487 1 897 2 483 2 443 2 834 2 334 1 407 299 145 84 110 227 181 858 666 536 304 75 33 5 20 38 41 86 112 103 39 27 21 29 19 24 29 167 122 52 53 91 70 38 93 124 81 276 474 311 74 82 52 32 67 101 71 259 416 277 41 4 18 6 19 - 10 17 26 34 29 84 107 33 76 82 73 131 538 248 128 64 55 18 49 59 56 53 283 176 67 483 294 217 444 554 619 523 596 521 445 334 153 123 257 201 388 265 159 146 110 56 44 36 77 60 126 68 17 34 28 75 9 28 36 25 68 53 27 35 49 245 151 212 203 209 514 118 97 114 107 112 52 78 53 99 109 43 45 53 39 145 73 57 45 71 118 33 30 66 43 3 - - - 5 10 - 290 235 277 184 325 395 196 209 305 157 132 148 156 140 190 223 117 94 173 58 57 18 23 12 49 36 28 18 23 - 92 69 81 32 71 107 35 78 85 69 24 9 8 22 5 5 - 15 24 - 863 551 486 646 828 1 049 888 1 093 1 034 726 156 68 51 52 92 89 241 201 200 143 27 21 29 15 15 25 104 90 34 36 12 27 5 27 38 14 44 66 43 6 39 39 14 44 32 22 55 202 131 66 393 216 152 304 418 423 379 440 383 342 145 78 51 105 173 151 154 180 119 128 58 42 73 78 82 188 51 23 43 35 32 25 4 17 19 30 20 11 11 4 149 125 179 102 142 278 98 135 199 130 24 9 8 22 5 5 - 15 24 - 2 107 1 292 1 127 1 487 1 897 2 483 2 443 2 834 2 334 1 407 120 46 59 96 100 142 89 95 73 60 475 332 311 425 487 760 840 449 379 329 196 173 167 184 212 323 263 223 217 188 184 96 60 138 145 142 153 93 105 131 88 49 33 63 38 63 36 40 31 28 91 34 43 97 141 118 77 252 138 63 414 233 153 246 241 386 262 705 518 208 103 38 23 29 111 113 174 303 147 110 70 47 38 41 81 116 42 65 108 52 60 45 76 54 48 57 35 62 77 56 164 142 143 70 133 227 192 178 245 43 74 103 86 43 55 75 226 239 165 105 91 51 55 55 131 81 133 229 151 86 161 73 41 101 145 185 146 99 157 132 12 3 6 29 41 18 38 25 40 4 2 107 1 292 1 127 1 487 1 897 2 483 2 443 2 834 2 334 1 407 1 695 1 006 904 1 256 1 541 2 065 1 924 2 160 1 814 1 026 362 232 189 182 299 323 429 334 415 322 158 120 145 80 150 120 294 159 181 151 50 48 34 39 57 95 80 319 105 59 - 6 - 10 - - 10 21 825 692 809 1 941 669 567 694 1 788 81.1 81.9 85.8 92.1 665 567 694 1 782 655 555 668 1 745 10 12 26 37 1.5 2.1 3.7 2.1 156 125 115 153 86 28 47 89 25 17 23 32 45 80 45 32 169 87 131 257 44 22 23 46 9 5 10 5 - 10 638 823 813 2 002 349 250 321 893 41.6 30.4 39.5 44.6 349 250 321 893 329 245 321 842 20 5 - 51 5.7 2.0 - 5.7 489 573 492 1 109 585 511 598 1 564 249 129 225 630 208 171 197 690 66 24 34 141 984 300 989 2 587 172 )59 242 801 31 36 26 93 31 18 66 179 83 88 115 310 65 62 109 269 5 16 6 21 92 36 107 238 63 21 60 114 187 172 184 506 135 101 102 268 45 45 32 51 26 13 16 44 115 77 79 171 45 30 16 49 42 39 29 36 10 - - - 94 93 115 208 67 55 78 11I 12 14 30 27 26 14 67 9 5 - 329 245 321 842 59 43 70 173 27 12 40 83 11 - 9 15 34 5 35 93 135 121 106 370 64 36 35 143 36 28 35 70 5 5 6 21 40 38 60 100 9 5 - - 984 800 989 2 587 87 71 54 89 325 224 276 746 193 120 97 325 77 45 32 146 15 17 19 68 40 9 27 118 127 150 202 426 33 39 53 209 19 27 33 61 32 15 24 43 39 43 50 119 79 56 104 316 43 50 37 83 46 33 74 138 22 21 4 25 984 800 989 2 587 789 597 771 2 003 157 135 181 470 69 57 110 286 38 68 37 114 'Includes allocated cases, not shown separately P-104 MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL, MINN., SMSA A.8 -16 CENSUS TRACTS Table P-4. Income Characteristics of the Population: 1970-Continued [Data based on sample, see text. For minimum base for derived figures (percent, median, etc.) and meaning of symbols, see text] Census Tracts INCOME IN 1969 OF FAMIUES AND UNRELATED INDIVIDUALS AN 1sIWs Less than 51,000 51,000 to 51,999 $2,000 to 52,999 53,000 to 53,999 $4.000 to$4.999____________ ..................... $5,000 to 55,999 56,000 to 56,999 $7,000 to 57,999 58,000 to $8.999___ 59,000 to 59,999 510,000 to $11,999 $12,000 to $14,999 $15,000 to $24,999 525,000 to $49,999 550,000 or more Median income Mean income Families and unrelated individuals Medan income Mean income Unrelated individuals Medan income Mean income TYPE OF INCOME IN 1969 OF FAMIUES All IwRies With woge or solory income Mean wage or solory income With nonfarm self-employment income Mean nonfarm self-employment income With farm self-employment income Meon form self-employment income _______ With Social Security income Mean Social Security income With public assistance or public welfare income _ Mean public ossistonce or public welfore income With other income Mean other income RATIO OF FAMILY INCOME TO POVERTY LEVEL' Percent of families with incomes: less than .50 of poverty level .50 to .74._ .75 to .991.00 to 1.24 1.2510 1.49 1.50 to 1.99 -- 2.00 to 2.99--___ ___ _________ _______ 3.00 or more ------___________________ INCOME BELOW POVERTY LEVEL' Percent of all families Mean family income Mean income deficit Percent receiving public assistance income Meon size of family With related children under 18 years Moon number of reloted children under 18 years With related children under 6 years __ Mean number of related children under 6 years Families with female head With related children under 18 years Mean number of related children under 18 years_ With reloted children under 6 years Percent in labor force Meon number of reloted children under 6 years _ Soak Peers Percent 65 years and over Civilian mole heads under 65 years Percent in lobor force UerelstM ierlvireels _______________________________ Percent of all unrelated individuals Mean income Mean income deficit Percent receiving public assistance income Percent 65 years and over Fences Percent of all persons Percent receiving Social Security income Percent 65 years and over Percent receiving Social Security income Related children under 18 years Percent living with both porents Neeseblds Percent of all households Owner occupied Mean volue of unit Renter occupied Mean gross rent _ Percent lacking some or all plumbing facilities St. Paul --Con. Tract Troct Tract Troct Tract Tract Tract Tract Troct Trott Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract 0320 0321 0322 0323 0324 0325 0326 0327 0328 0329 0330 0331 0332 0333 0334 973 679 734 1 121 762 1 128 927 676 325 343 413 516 521 972 387 17 7 11 6 14 29 20 - - 16 11 16 14 5 4 10 6 11 26 9 31 7 8 17 33 27 4 11 13 5 18 4 26 28 42 54 45 63 17 55 35 15 16 28 56 24 34 17 35 42 52 62 30 36 43 17 33 26 43 28 26 48 44 36 45 34 65 52 40 57 24 6 21 26 44 43 51 28 59 28 66 36 60 22 76 24 17 25 36 39 62 37 35 46 50 56 78 51 14 4 31 22 45 33 44 51 74 53 81 37 112 58 54 36 8 21 46 36 51 50 113 42 76 108 58 97 67 54 19 7 26 60 53 90 28 82 51 55 62 48 68 78 54 28 16 24 62 31 69 40 222 104 104 175 119 196 144 70 40 11 74 88 75 166 89 146 123 151 258 145 177 174 118 40 8 30 64 87 193 107 148 93 106 181 111 147 86 47 13 - 56 74 76 168 42 11 5 13 20 - 9 7 7 3 - 13 9 5 28 11 4 - 14 8 - 9 - - - 23 - 510 365 $9 716 510 212 510 840 510 134 $9 485 - 59 327 $- 8 370 57 458 $4 430 58 635 59 629 59 435 511 108 58 839 510 815 510 033 510 882 $11 170 511 451 $9 680 $9 308 59 320 57 817 $6 025 59 344 510 218 510 116 513 256 59 035 1 343 2 087 1 252 1 472 962 1 600 1 410 1 017 1 031 755 730 999 1 098 1 661 1 599 58 929 $3 341 56 891 $8 913 58 414 57 450 $6 797 56 384 53 136 51 942 54 357 56 750 56 370 58 033 $3 035 59 221 $4 937 $7 621 59 409 59 855 $7 966 57 348 57 484 54 320 $3 623 56 269 57 266 57 031 59 477 55 155 370 1 408 518 351 200 472 483 341 706 412 317 483 577 689 1 012 54 623 51 738 $1 815 $3 228 53 048 53 265 52 885 $2 793 51 980 51 266 51 623 53 189 54 019 53 445 51 605 55 031 52 479 53 001 $3 787 53 773 $3 869 53 588 53 844 52 710 51 623 52 263 $4 112 54 245 $4 145 52 904 973 679 734 1 121 762 1 128 927 676 325 343 413 516 521 972 587 875 596 631 984 666 1 010 795 593 305 218 347 474 456 838 509 $10 351 59 393 $10 523 510 962 511 170 59 539 $9 235 $9 238 57 450 56 051 59 650 59 592 $9 949 511 030 58 717 67 67 54 50 65 62 32 24 9 4 13 34 13 112 13 53 341 54 399 57 304 53 438 58 395 $4 229 $4 606 ... ... ... 58 262 ... 515 343 ... 4 12 32 12 - 4 - _ - - 20 8 ... .. -5539 ... - ... _ _ _ _ _ - - ... ... 216 168 188 323 209 264 241 149 67 80 79 115 92 265 167 51 983 $2 010 52 137 52 204 $1 929 $1 507 $1 931 51 883 51 487 $1 625 52 037 $1 503 51 763 82 191 51 640 33 29 22 29 42 54 112 86 49 219 64 29 41 56 44 5992 $1 722 51 695 5426 51 385 52 036 82 271 51 383 $2 472 51 756 51 303 5882 51 754 $2 182 510 363 374 555 253 502 329 223 95 56 113 182 215 478 273 $1 527 $1 444 81 466 51 419 $1 263 51 084 51 355 $1 125 5742 51 341 51 913 51 289 $2 071 52 595 51 636 1.7 1.0 2.5 0.5 3.8 3.5 2.5 1.3 - 11.1 5.6 3.9 4.8 0.5 0.7 1.0 0.9 0.5 1.8 - 1.6 1.2 0.7 3.4 7.9 - 1.9 1.2 1.3 1.9 0.4 0.6 1.1 1.4 2.0 3.1 4.7 7.7 9.8 33.5 8.2 2.5 1.2 3.4 4.6 0.9 3.1 3.3 2.1 3.1 3.8 6.0 8.1 9.5 14.9 4.6 3.1 2.9 0.9 4.9 2.9 4.7 5.6 3.3 4.5 2.9 5.3 5.0 3.4 12.5 3.6 2.9 8.1 1.6 5.1 14.0 11.8 11.4 9.2 9.6 13.7 12.2 10.1 18.2 6.4 9.7 10.7 4.8 10.3 15.5 23.0 22.4 24.5 31.6 31.4 28.5 25.8 28.6 21.2 9.3 26.6 28.7 30.5 27.3 27.3 56.0 55.5 51.1 50.0 45.7 42.9 42.3 38.5 34.5 4.4 41.6 46.3 46.6 54.6 40.0 31 17 30 42 44 03 78 66 43 180 57 43 37 51 42 3.2 2.5 4.1 3.7 5.8 8.2 8.4 9.8 13.2 52.5 13.8 8.3 7.1 5.2 7.2 $1 005 ... 51 110 51 499 81 839 $1 620 $2 221 $2 687 52 577 53 142 51 641 $1 835 51 550 52 187 52 235 81 785 ... $1 514 5876 51 876 $1 398 $1 328 5619 $767 51 324 51 138 $1 504 51 668 5547 5923 29.0 - 10.0 - 43.2 14.0 46.2 56.1 34.9 70.0 31.6 44.2 32.4 49.0 19.0 2.52 2.47 2.21 4.11 3.09 3.74 3.44 3.53 5.52 2.67 3.44 3.30 2.61 3.26 17 11 21 14 30 61 68 50 26 157 17 37 23 27 32 ... ... ... .. 3.27 1.93 2.68 2.48 2.27 4.50 ... 2.27 ... 1.81 2.09 13 I1 14 4 30 33 47 19 20 120 13 23 17 12 15 ... ... ... ... 1.80 1.36 1.38 ... ... 2.32 ... ... ... . ... 9 7 14 '9 8 42 52 29 26 118 27 27 17 39 21 9 7 14 9 5 35 52 29 20 106 17 27 17 27 21 ... ... ... ... ... 1.66 2.88 1.69 ... 4.15 ... 2.19 ... 1.81 ... 9 7 la 4 5 25 42 10 14 73 13 18 11 12 8 - - ... - - 36.0 33.3 - - - ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 1.16 1.31 ... ... 2.55 ... 31 17 30 42 44 93 78 66 43 1e0 57 43 37 51 42 12.9 - 30.0 88.1 31.8 24.7 12.8 16.7 11.6 16.7 45.6 14.0 24.3 37.3 23.8 18 10 7 5 25 34 16 26 12 51 14 10 11 - 11 ... ... ... ... 64.0 70.6 69.2 ... 60.8 ... - .. 65 162 94 109 70 112 155 115 337 336 200 150 152 217 217 17.9 25.0 32.6 32.5 35.0 23.7 32.1 33.7 47.7 81.6 63.1 31.1 26.3 31.5 37.9 51 157 $924 51 110 5944 51 266 5955 51 075 $1 169 $936 5908 5968 51 120 $791 51 109 $862 5632 5882 5709 $825 5532 5819 $737 5650 5911 5902 5798 5690 $1 018 5754 51 028 7.7 3.1 12.8 - 15.7 13.4 8.4 18.3 8.3 13.4 21.0 20.7 10.5 5.1 53.8 53.7 53.2 78.0 67.1 73.2 36.8 56.5 20.5 32.1 87.5 57.3 57.9 31.3 12.4 143 200 168 202 251 399 447 342 489 1 329 352 2911 274 350 3S4 4.2 7.5 5.9 4.8 9.1 9.5 11.6 12.4 27.4 61.5 20.7 12.2 12.4 8.2 14.7 44.8 41.5 23.8 59.9 24.7 35.3 14.8 29.2 17.0 12.0 52.0 34.2 28.5 33.1 27.7 31.5 43.5 37.5 74.8 29.1 32.8 16.1 23.7 18.4 10.8 61.1 30.9 38.0 28.9 13.6 100.0 95.4 63.5 74.2 84.9 68.7 72.2 100.0 71.1 86.8 80.0 100.0 70.2 83.2 100.0 29 8 30 16 104 113 201 150 55 695 54 94 60 57 58 27.6 ... 26.7 86.5 41.6 17.4 63.3 7.3 39.1 - 31.9 28.3 25.9 79 112 90 106 t 153 135 148 181 294 226 97 82 152 100 6.9 10.5 10.5 8.1 11.5 12.5 12.2 17.3 25.1 62.0 36.2 13.7 9.8 11.7 11.8 60 15 65 87 54 46 44 27 6 4 24 15 27 27 43 $14 200 .,. $16 000 $15 400 $13 700 $13 000 $9 000 $9 400 ... ... ... ... $15 300 $18 900 $15 400 19 97 25 19 44 107 91 121 175 290 202 82 55 125 57 $82 $92 5108 $97 $97 589 578 883 852 $86 598 $84 $95 6.3 14.3 6.7 5.7 4.1 5.2 7.4 8.8 24.3 - 2.2 9.3 - 21.7 5.0 'Excludes inmates of institutions, members of the Armed Forces living in barracks, college students in dormitories, and unrelated individuals under 14 years. CENSUS TRACTS A.8-17 MINNEAPOUS-ST. PAUL, MINN., SMSA P-137 Table P-4. Income Characteristics of the Population: 1970-Continued [Data based on sample. see text. For minimum bose for derived figures (percent, median, etc.) and meaning of symbols, see text) Census Tracts INCOME IN 1969 OF FAMIUES AND UNRELATED INDIVIDUALS AN families Less than $1,000.-__ 51,000 to El 999 $2,000 to $2,999 53,000 to $3 999 54,000 to 54,999 $5,000 to $5,999 56,000 to $6,999________ $7.000 to $7,999 58,000 to 58,999 $9.000 to $9 999 $10,000 to $11,999 512,000 to $14,999 515,000 to $24,999 _____________ ________ ____ 525,000 to 549,999 $50,000 or more__________________ Median income Meon income Families and unrelated individuals Median income Mean income Unrelated individuals______ _____________ __________ Medinn income Mean income TYPE OF INCOME IN 1969 OF FAMILIES All families With wage or salary income _______ ____ Mean wage or solory income With nonfarm self-employment income Mean nonfarm self-employment income With farm self-employment income Mean form self-employment income With Sociol Security income Mean Social Security income With public assistance or public welfare income Mean public nssistonce or public welfare income With other income Mean other income -----. RATIO OF FAMILY INCOME TO POVERTY LEVEL, Percent of families with incomes. Less than 50 of poverty level .50 to 74 _ 75 to 99 1.00 to 1.24 1 25 to 1.49 1.50 to 1 99 2.00 to 2.99 ____________ 3.00or more____ INCOME BELOW POVERTY LEVEL' Females__ _..--- ____ ____________ _____________ ___ Percent of all families ------------------------- Mean tinnily income Mean income deficit _________ _________ Percent receiving public assistance income Mecn size of family _______ _______ With related children under 18 yeors Meon number of related children under 18 yeors With 'elated children under 6 yeors Mean number of related children under 6 yeors Families Families with female head With related children under 18 years Mean number of related children under 18 yeors_ With related children under 6 years Percent in labor force Mean number of related children under 6 years _ Fam*y heeds Percent 65 years and over Civilian male heads under 65 years _ Percent in labor force INeeleted hidivide is Percent of all unrelated individuals Mean income - Mean income deficit Percent receiving public assistance income Percent 65 years and over St. Poul-Con. Penes Percent of all persons Percent receiving Social Security income Percent 65 years and over Percent receiving Social Security income Related children under 18 yeors Percent living with both parents 11e6sa6a ds Percent of all households Owner occupied Mean value of unit ___ Renter occupied Mean gross rent Percent locking some or all plumbing facilities Tract Troct Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Troct Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Troct Tract 0335 0336 0337 0338 0339 0340 0342 0344 0345 0346 0347 0348 0349 0350 0351 790 362 263 604 429 460 125 732 1 200 2 081 1 893 566 938 835 693 42 50 - 31 27 41 - 20 16 24 29 5 - 10 - 8 17 17 10 14 33 4 33 10 24 21 6 10 6 - 32 24 9 36 38 46 18 43 47 64 22 15 10 28 16 68 37 24 52 61 43 14 28 28 38 46 - 20 18 63 84 50 9 42 42 71 8 39 41 109 27 20 32 26 17 60 5 16 74 22 45 4 12 53 29 33 2 48 28 35 53 38 13 36 37 27 5 31 73 82 72 11 63 43 12 52 16 13 50 28 19 22 79 74 114 123 15 37 57 18 32 22 20 65 31 26 11 84 101 159 130 27 56 59 61 42 29 51 41 14 26 4 60 125 163 158 10 45 72 28 117 30 25 63 61 37 16 128 227 373 325 53 124 99 78 107 30 18 34 43 25 15 98 239 391 386 77 187 131 134 77 14 48 61 11 21 - 77 147 435 468 164 221 170 157 16 - - 9 - - - - 13 71 53 121 53 71 70 - - - - - 4 - 6 5 - 40 32 17 4 57 923 55 600 $9 206 57 420 56 284 54 944 57 432 58 964 $10 282 $11 257 511 757 517 561 $12 385 511 424 512 414 $8 862 $6 250 $9 188 58 197 56 836 55 933 59 250 59 107 $10 670 511 696 $12 222 522 151 $14 674 513 854 513 770 1 287 694 588 818 1 034 1 276 1 837 1 121 1 555 2 855 2 225 1 047 2 068 1 325 2 381 55 523 53 148 55 625 55 872 $3 814 54 246 $2 933 57 294 $9 077 59 322 $10 955 $10 163 $5 778 $8 020 $1 935 56 998 54 545 56 398 56 948 $4 811 54 989 54 081 57 311 59 126 59 441 511 178 $18 894 58 289 510 090 E5 423 497 332 325 214 605 816 1 712 389 355 774 332 481 1 130 490 1 688 53 021 51 699 52 807 52 818 52 627 $3 649 52 787 53 654 $3 406 52 129 $4 617 52 367 51 845 53 140 51 194 54 035 52 686 54 140 53 424 53 376 $4 456 $3 703 53 930 53 904 $3 378 55 224 $15 062 E2 990 53 676 51 996 790 362 263 604 429 460 125 732 1 200 2 081 1 893 566 936 835 693 652 280 224 517 354 358 93 668 1 076 1 820 1 755 473 860 748 592 58 627 $6 453 59 067 58 048 $6 984 $5 697 $10 183 58 822 $10 290 $11 685 $11 688 517 035 512 320 511 414 512 742 26 12 16 46 22 12 8 46 96 119 194 133 149 117 83 $13 838 ... ... 54 498 ... ... ... 53 878 54 760 56 363 55 477 $16 937 $8 837 58 882 59 623 - _ - 4 - - - 10 5 10 15 - 10 5 4 231 - 80 69 - 142 62 - 168 42 - 134 299 443 273 144 - 204 205 147 $1 848 $1 559 51 783 $970 51 146 52 219 51 590 51 646 51 955 52 072 51 843 $1 865 51 740 51 905 $2 415 79 108 38 121 118 71 5 91 63 39 23 10 10 30 20 52 246 El 438 51 725 51 981 SI 967 51 402 5981 $1 925 51 088 ... ... .. 51 780 245 65 68 166 89 148 43 232 431 996 873 407 548 454 378 51 684 51 502 51 710 51 143 51 372 E1 149 52 860 $1 202 51 323 $1 355 51 159 54 756 $2 705 53 401 52 189 5.3 18.5 1.9 6.3 7.2 11.1 - 5.3 1.8 1.2 2.4 0.9 0.5 1.9 - 1.0 1.4 4.6 5.5 3.3 4.1 3.2 - 0.3 0.7 0.5 1.9 - 0.6 0.7 5.1 6.9 5.3 6.1 5.8 12.8 - 7.4 3.3 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.5 0.5 1.4 6.7 9.7 5.7 9.3 17.7 5.0 14.4 3.7 4.4 2.4 0.7 0.9 3.2 2.0 0.7 4.6 9.4 4.2 7.9 7.9 4.1 3.2 5.6 2.2 3.7 1.7 0.9 1.3 4.7 5.9 19.7 16.6 8.0 16.2 12.6 22.0 14.4 12.7 10.0 7.2 9.1 3.5 8.3 6.7 8.7 20.5 17.7 26.6 21.0 20.3 15.9 7.2 25.3 29.8 24.5 23.3 8.0 23.2 25.4 23.1 37.1 19.9 43.7 27.6 25.2 25.0 57.6 40.0 48.3 59.3 61. 3 83.0 62.9 58.2 59.5 90 97 31 103 70 129 4 93 65 62 72 21 10 25 15 11.4 26.8 11.8 17.9 16.3 28.0 3.2 12.7 5.4 3.0 3.8 3.7 1.1 3.0 2 2 51 678 51 426 52 135 52 278 51 878 51 811 ... 51 898 52 602 51 218 51 390 ... 51 372 ... 51 524 52 675 5784 51 342 51 560 51 407 ... 51 354 51 096 $1 087 52 162 ... 51 437 ... 14.4 51.5 61.3 31.5 57.1 35.7 - 47.3 7.7 16.1 - ... - 20.0 3.48 4.78 2.94 3.89 3.77 3.29 ... 3.42 4.14 2.06 3.79 . - . ... 2.80 69 83 19 81 49 84 - 61 47 4 60 5 5 15 10 2.38 3.16 ... 2.95 3.33 2.61 - 2.92 3.43 ... 2.65 ... ... ... ... 39 39 5 38 40 51 - 51 27 4 40 - - 10 4 1.15 1.59 1.18 1.58 1.80 - 1.71 1.37 1.38 - - .. 61 63 27 58 49 62 4 51 32 15 39 6 - 9 11 57 55 19 54 43 48 - 51 32 - 39 - - 9 6 1.72 3.53 ... 3.04 3.51 2.56 - 2.82 2.50 - 2.67 - - ... ... 27 28 5 22 34 31 - 45 18 24 - - 4 - 70.4 10.7 - - 11.8 19.4 - 66.7 ... - ... - - ... - 1.00 1.29 1.50 2.16 - 1.67 ... - ... - 90 97 31 100 70 129 4 93 65 62 72 21 10 25 15 23.3 8.2 38.7 16.7 14.3 13.2 ... 29.0 26.2 71.0 16.7 ... - 24.0 17 34 - 32 :2 60 - 15 21 13 21 5 10 10 4 ... 47.1 - 62.5 ... 70.0 - ... ... - ... ... ... ... ... 186 193 105 89 223 221 554 103 123 355 81 60 211 167 210 37.4 58.1 32.3 41.6 36.9 27.1 32.4 26.5 34.6 45.9 24.4 23.1 33.3 34.1 35,9 51 130 $956 5902 $682 $940 5760 $834 $867 $896 51 006 $879 51 001 $938 5887 5715 5.659 $838 $915 51 146 $910 51 081 E1 025 $928 5917 5778 5926 $887 $956 5963 51 163 9.1 35.8 22.9 5.6 18.8 13.6 12.5 3.9 4.9 17.5 - - 2.8 - - 65.6 74.1 41.9 41.6 42.2 37.6 38.1 60.2 40.7 66.8 60.5 23.8 30.8 43.7 20.5 499 657 196 509 487 646 562 421 392 463 354 142 241 237 273 15.0 36.9 16.7 20.2 23.7 29.9 28.5 14.3 8.1 5.8 4.7 6.1 6.0 6.1 8.5 30.7 26.5 36.2 18.9 25.3 21.1 32.9 24.5 24.7 59.8 9.9 28.9 16.2 19.4 17.2 32.1 23.0 33.7 14.7 24.4 15.5 39.0 28.5 20.4 67.5 19.8 27.5 27.0 33.3 17.6 87.5 91.4 87.9 89.3 84.9 73.0 76.7 74.2 77.5 770 44.3 51.3 60.0 58.2 79.2 193 273 51 255 146 218 - 150 154 5 164 11 10 24 14 30.1 17.2 - 27.8 47.2 - 23.3 46.1 31.7 216 232 102 151 219 304 332 149 127 348 116 70 64 110 95 20.3 42.0 20.6 23.6 29.4 28.3 23.2 16.4 9.9 13.3 5.5 9.1 5.0 10.0 9.8 93 16 4 42 22 7 - 18 64 120 88 20 15 32 15 514 700 $13 600 ... - . 5.13 700 5.14 100 520 700 ... 5.23 200 123 216 98 109 197 297 332 131 63 228 28 50 49 78 80 584 • $67 $86 5.86 $71 $84 $65 $84 $106 $67 5147 5121 $101 $134 5105 6.0 5.2 3.9 6.0 30.1 23.0 49.7 16.1 2.4 - - 7.1 7.8 5.5 5.3 'Excludes inmates of institutions, members of the Armed Forces living in borrocks, college students in dormitories. and unrelated individuals under 14 years. P-138 MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL, MINN., SMSA Aa8-18 CENSUS TRACTS Table P-4. Income Characteristics of the Population: 1970-Continued (Data based on sample, see text. For minimum base for derived figures (percent, median, etc.) and meaning of symbols, see text] Census Tracts INCOME IN 1969 OF FAMIUES AND UNRELATED INDIVIDUALS AR females __________ _________ _________ " less than $1.000 $1.000 to $1,999 $2,000 to $2,999 $3,000 to $3,999 $4.000 to $4,999 $5.000 to 55,999 $6.000 to $6.999 $7.000 to 57,999 $8,000 to $8,999 $9,000 to $9,999 $10,000 to $11,999 $12,000 to 514,999_- 515,000 to $24,999 $25,000 to $49,999 550,000 or more Median income Mean income Families and unrelated individuols ___________________ Median income Meon income Unrelated individuals Medan income ___'__________ ________________ Meon income TYPE OF INCOME IN 1969 OF FAMILIES AR families With wage or salary income Mean wage or salary income With nonfarm self-employment income Mean nonfarm self-employment income With form self-employment income Mean farm self-employment income With Social Security income Mean Social Security income With public assistance or public welfare income Mean public assistance or public welfare income With other income Mean other income RATIO OF FAMILY INCOME TO POVERTY LEVEL' Percent of families with incomes: Less than .50 of povei ty level __ _ .50to.74________ .75 to .99 1.00 to 1.24 1.25 to 1.49 1.50 to 1.99___________________ 2.00 to 2.99----- --------------- - 3.00ormore _____ INCOME BELOW POVERTY LEVEL' Percent of all families __________________ Mean fomily income Mean income deficit Percent receiving public assistance income Mean size of family With related children under 18 years Mean number of related children under 18 years With related children under 6 years Mean number of related children under 6 years ___ Families with female head With related children under 18 years Mean number of related children under 18 years_ With related children under 6 years _____________ Percent in labor force Mean number of related children under 6 years _ Featly heeds __ Percent 65 years and over Civilian male heads under 65 yeors Percent in labor force Uereleted le#rlhwk Percent of all unrelated individuals Mean income Mean income deficit Percent receiving public assistance income Percent 65 years and over terse. Percent of all persons Percent receiving Social Security income_ Percent 65 years and over Percent receiving Social Security income Related children under 18 years Percent living with both porents NeeseMNs Percent of all households Owner occupied Mean value of unit Renter occupied Moon gross rent Percent locking some or all plumbing facilities St. Paul -Con. Troct Tract Tract Tract Tract Troct Tract Troct Tract Troct Tract tract Troct Tract Tract 0352 0353 0354 0355 0356 0357 0358 0359 0360 0361 0362 0363 0364 0365 0366 1 050 1 254 821 612 528 788 813 422 427 441 1 392 940 1 342 1 318 1 374 17 21 51 28 17 4 9 16 13 14 8 - 6 - 17 21 12 7 39 11 10 14 23 18 8 7 11 15 14 37 28 47 62 14 5 45 18 13 23 19 32 14 36 5 35 28 72 69 41 13 48 16 36 29 30 39 23 44 25 55 16 25 55 5 44 73 65 44 33 37 27 59 60 41 20 64 55 30 29 15 65 21 15 20 50 20 44 46 38 35 46 52 55 38 40 46 19 33 44 33 51 71 95 53 71 106 35 39 47 27 65 31 39 51 56 52 65 43 48 64 79 53 47 33 20 22 47 22 39 82 46 103 133 66 78 96 68 28 49 64 33 61 15 37 114 79 93 92 87 144 213 158 83 8c 112,.. 85 29 51 53 176 126 167 227 200 183 235 64 28 527 115 88 38 92 45 183 223 285 234 229 222 230 120 44 66 208 123 31 36 37 337 181 309 263 352 56 80 14 5 33 80 72 - 8 227 75 79 30 158 12 - 8 26 25 7 - 40 22 13 - 41 $11 278 $11 230 59 199 $6 418 59 592 • $12 913 $9 591 $8 043 88 114 $7 971 $13 492 $12 148 $12 158 $10 837 $13 218 $13 416 $12 609 59 417 57 080 $11 859 $16 448 $22 416 58 631 58 618 58 756 $17 645 $14 096 $13 402 $11 457 $16 933 1 800 1 967 1 354 1 713 1 122 1 126 2 139 856 793 723 2 115 2 296 1 768 1 902 1 707 $7 961 58 525 $5 670 53 991 $6 254 $10 613 55 349 54 989 $4 916 54 724 $10 125 53 940 $10 033 59 037 $11 803 59 642 $9 884 57 059 54 952 57 947 $13 471 $11 801 $6 309 $6 099 $6 071 $14 093 $7 451 $11 138 59 606 $14 832 750 713 533 1 101 594 338 1 326 434 366 282 723 1 316 426 584 333 $2 986 $4 589 52 734 52 958 $3 867 $5 033 53 835 53 186 52 500 51 440 55 548 $1 146 $2 948 54 853 $4 458 $4 359 $5 092 53 427 53 770 $4 469 56 530 55 293 54 051 $3 161 51 874 57 255 $2 503 $4 004 55 427 56 162 1 050 1 254 821 612 528 744 813 422 427 441 1 392 980 1 342 1 314 1 374 919 1 095 706 443 458 680 733 381 355 379 1 158 833 1 120 1 083 1 152 $12 006 $11 607 59 488 $7 495 $10 977 $13 717 59 57/ 58 326 $9 313 $8 336 $14 447 $12 319 $12 209 $11 081 $13 862 139 145 70 60 50 140 114 16 24 28 224 97 183 101 233 59 308 56 731 $3 916 54 378 59 660 $13 363 58 725 ... ... $6 329 $13 038 $11 303 58 699 55 205 $10 409 22 11 8 - 14 6 6 - 8 4 8 4 15 - 283 357 127 190 - 126 144 190 98 88 135 440 263 420 435 363 51 589 51 823 51 439 $1 424 $2 024 51 853 $1 858 $1 435 $1 872 $1 661 $2 052 52 317 $1 954 $2 047 51 816 34 49 142 134 46 4 58 38 27 38 14 5 8 15 21 51 191 $1 783 51 964 $1 544 $1 389 ... 51 414 52 209 $883 $2 008 ... ... ... ... ... 579 665 224 202 218 480 432 77 120 146 1 026 639 828 753 809 $2 173 52 109 $1 290 $1 348 $1 957 53 080 $22 411 52 301 $580 51 504 53 893 $2 885 52 259 52 212 55 148 2.8 1.7 6.2 8.2 3.2 0.5 1.7 5.0 3.0 4.1 0.6 - 0.9 0.4 1.2 1.0 0.7 3.3 3.4 0.9 1.8 1.8 1.7 3.3 5.2 - 1 0 0.2 1.1 0.9 1.9 0.5 2.6 5.4 2.8 1.0 4.9 9.0 2.6 5.2 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.8 0.5 3.0 2.9 5.6 10.6 3.2 1.1 2.6 5.9 8.0 9.5 0.9 2.4 0.8 2.3 1.5 3.8 2.1 4.4 4.6 3.2 0.6 3.4 5.2 7.7 5.7 1.9 1.3 1.3 3.9 1.9 8.6 9.1 13.8 18.1 7.0 6.1 12.2 20.4 17.1 9.8 3.7 7.1 6.5 8.9 6.0 21.4 24.2 30.8 22.4 26.1 21.7 20.3 18.2 17.6 31.5 16.3 25.9 24.7 22.4 17.0 57.5 58.9 33.4 27.3 53.4 67.1 53.0 34.6 40.7 29.0 76.2 61.6 65.1 60.3 71.0 59 36 99 104 37 26 69 66 38 64 13 15 20 29 36 5.6 2.9 12.1 17.0 7.0 3.3 8.5 15.6 8.9 14.5 0.9 1.5 1.5 2.2 2.6 $1 659 $814 51 478 51 592 51 149 $2 642 $2 106 52 205 $1 645 $2 227 ... ... $2 084 51 192 $1 371 $1 602 $1 924 51 743 $2 000 $1 223 $937 51 510 51 312 $1 883 ... 51 105 51 296 42.4 - 40.4 59.6 10.8 23.2 24.2 23.7 20.3 - - ... 16.7 3.03 2.50 3.59 3.51 3.14 4.31 3.07 4.05 2.89 5.02 ... ... ... 3.38 2.28 41 8 89 75 22 16 49 47 16 45 4 3 9 8 12 1.80 ... 2.52 3.09 ... ... 1.71 3.53 ... 4.76 ... ... ... .. . 15 3 74 52 4 12 49 37 16 27 - 3 8 5 .. ... 1.86 1.56 ... ... 1.43 1.57 ... 1.85 - .. . 28 8 63 79 28 8 19 47 13 26 9 - 3 5 20 19 8 63 67 22 8 10 36 9 26 4 - 3 - 7 ... ... 2.37 2.63 ... ... ... 3.78 ... 5.00 ... - ... - ... 9 3 54 44 4 4 10 29 9 18 - - 3 - 13.0 29.5 - - 13.8 - - - - - _ ... ... 1.52 1.66 1.45 ... ... - - ... - 59 36 99 104 37 26 69 66 38 64 13 15 20 29 36 30.5 77.8 10.1 9 6 27.0 15.4 23.2 12.1 21.1 29.7 ... 37.9 47.2 22 - 26 20 5 14 39 11 21 19 - 10 12 18 5 ... - 73.1 - ... 100.0 ... ... ... 270 96 178 425 122 69 392 140 148 190 123 416 124 110 SS 36.9 13.5 33.4 38.6 20.5 20.4 29.6 32.3 40.4 67.4 17.0 50.7 29.1 18.8 16.5 51 214 $990 5992 5986 $984 $724 $986 $931 $736 51 075 51 055 $470 $874 $876 $995 $624 $821 $828 $851 $825 $1 074 $870 $908 $1 070 $712 $731 $1 318 $915 $911 $789 3.7 - 19.1 22.8 4.1 15.9 18.6 3.6 18.9 31.1 - 41.9 62.5 50.6 53.9 49.2 69.6 29.1 20.7 61.5 65.8 68.3 52.6 - 61.3 55.5 60.0 449 186 533 790 238 181 604 407 258 511 157 459 179 208 137 9.7 3.4 14.4 25.4 10.0 5.3 16.2 20.8 14.3 23.2 3.0 11.2 3.7 4.4 2.8 36.3 52.7 16.9 27.2 29.4 16.6 30.3 14.3 50.0 30.1 59.9 15.0 48.6 29.8 35.0 32.3 62.9 19.9 30.8 33.6 30.9 22.5 11.3 43.4 31.5 63.7 49.9 53.1 38.9 43.8 91.0 74.4 67.9 72.4 75.0 42.9 81.6 100.0 91.1 89.4 88.0 25.8 84.2 76.5 70.0 70 35 243 200 66 67 102 151 53 216 12 7 20 39 16 47.1 - 26.7 - - 47.8 89.2 15.2 47.2 39.8 - ... 100.0 ... 230 103 194 483 98 70 312 127 144 212 106 66 123 84 67 15.8 5.9 18.4 31.2 11.7 7.3 18.5 18.5 23.3 34.4 5.4 5.5 7.4 4.9 4.1 75 20 13 8 19 28 26 18 18 21 51 38 81 63 30 $21 900 ... ... ... ... $19 100 $36 600 ... ... ... $26 000 $24 700 $17 700 $15 100 $16 900 . 155 83 181 475 79 42 286 109 126 191 55 28 42 21 37 $95 $98 588 $58 $91 $118 $76 567 $58 $63 $225 $80 $120 $167 7.0 4.9 12.9 27.1 - - 20.2 17.3 52.8 4.7 4.7 - - 16.7 - 'Excludes inmates of institutions, members of the Armed Forces living in borrocks, college students in dormitories, and unrelated individuals under 14 years. CENSUS TRACTS A.8 -19 MINNEAPOUS-ST. PAUL, MINN., SMSA P -139 Table P-4. Income Characteristics of the Population: 1970-Continued [Data based on somple, see text. For minimum base for derived figures (percent, medion, etc.) and meaning of symbols, see text) Census Tracts INCOME IN 1969 OF FAMIUES AND UNRELATED INDIVIDUALS AN fenNbs Less thon $1,000 $1.000 to $2,000 to $2,999 __ $3,000 to $3.999 $4,000 to $4,999 $5,000 to $5,999 $6,000 to $6,999 $7,000 to $7,999 $8,000 to $8,999 $9,000 to $9,999 $10,000 to $11,999 $12,000 to $14,999 $15,000 to $24,999 $25,000 to $49,999 $50,000 or more Median income Mean income__ Families and unrelated individuals ___ Medion income Mean income Unrelated individuols Median income Meon income TYPE OF INCOME IN 1969 OF FAMILIES AN fu81.n With wage or salary income Meon wage or salory income With nonfarm self-employment income_____ Mean nonfarm self-employment income __ __ __ __ __ With form self-employment income Mean farm self-employment income _ With Social Security income Mean Social Security income With public assistance or public welfare income __ Mean public assistance or public welfare income With other income Mean other income RATIO OF FAMILY INCOME TO POVERTY LEVEL' Percent of families with incomes Less than .50 of poverty level 50 to .74 .75 to .99 1.00 to 1.24__________ 1.25 to 1.49 ___________________ 1.50 to 1.99_____________________ ________ 2.00 to 2.99_______ _______ __________ _________ _ 3.00 or more _______________ INCOME BELOW POVERTY LEVEL' FamRMs_________________________________________ Percent of all families Meon family income Mean income deficit Percent receiving public assistance income Mean size of family _______ ___________ With reloted children under 18 years Mean number of related children under 18 years With reloted children under 6 years Meon number of related children under 6 years Fomilies with female head With related children under 18 years Mean number of reloted children uncle- 18 years_ With related children under 6 years Percent in labor force Mean number of related children under 6 years _ Feely heeds Percent 65 years and over _ Civilian male heads under 65 years________________ Percent in labor force Uereblel ieNvldeeb Percent of all unrelated individuols Meon income Mean income deficit Percent receiving public assistance income Percent 65 years and over_ ►epees Percent of all persons Percent receiving Social Security income Percent 65 years and over Percent receiving Social Security income Related children under 18 years Percent living with both parents NewelwIds Percent of all households Owner occupied Mean value of unit Renter occupied Mean gross rent Percent locking some or all plumbing focilities St. Paul -Con. Tract Tract Troct Troct Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Troct 0367 0368 0369 0370 0371 0372 0374 0375 0376.01 0376.02 1 294 786 732 975 1 127 1 618 1 390 1 687 1 265 720 15 7 13 28 26 28 15 4 17 9 5 7 38 12 18 2 5 9 15 9 60 32 49 32 . 36 103 14 13 23 11 34 50 44 64 43 56 10 29 39 29 42 6 48 34 65 105 6 33 39 23 76 49 31 58 75 68 32 34 23 24 70 28 47 46 68 132 31 59 40 63 58 59 59 72 46 134 53 40 57 80 76 47 73 98 88 167 89 45 83 99 166 130 36 53 100 116 58 66 82 55 191 137 113 136 169 240 216 154 153 103 244 109 113 133 209 221 273 213 252 107 217 113 59 200 164 223 485 502 370 108 40 12 - 9 10 23 88 345 61 - - 9 - 10 - 15 141 11 - $10 471 $9 831 58 507 $9 821 $9 985 $9 121 $13 824 $17 878 $12 732 $9 236 $11 234 $10 580 $9 653 $10 364 $10 518 $9 773 $15 093 $22 782 $13 739 $10 030 1 721 1 176 1 097 1 230 1 704 2 142 1 799 2 154 1 952 1 247 $9 169 $8 000 $6 802 $8 600 57 455 $8 020 $11 914 $14 115 $9 369 $7 671 $9 272 $8 215 58 124 $9 485 $8 255 $8 360 $13 178 $19 190 $10 531 $8 166 427 390 365 255 577 524 409 467 687 527 51 997 $2 679 $3 330 $5 297 $2 910 $2 941 $7 136 $4 708 $3 570 $5 618 $3 326 $3 449 $5 057 $6 122 $3 835 $3 997 $6 670 $6 214 $4 624 $5 619 1 294 786 732 975 1 127 1 618 1 390 1 687 1 265 720 1 133 680 591 842 967 1 418 1 313 1 443 1 155 680 $10 923 $10 151 $9 209 $10 114 $10 324 $9 491 $14 216 $17 974 $12 710 59 739 61 50 34 72 65 95 123 387 131 44 $7 876 $6 946 $15 044 $4 000 $5 768 55 288 58 155 $17 483 $8 501 $5 368 - 6 - 5 5 7 15 22 11 - 316 - 218 193 - 246 286 391 120 364 253 76 $1 915 E1 936 $1 693 $2 021 $1 988 $2 012 $1 300 $1 927 $1 546 $1 894 20 52 95 59 89 112 3 17 14 9 $1 638 $1 967 $2 010 $1 175 $1 525 631 348 277 422 489 599 682 1 223 640 283 $1 678 $1 588 52 160 51 623 E1 682 $1 471 $1 667 $4 086 $1 775 $748 1.2 0.9 2.6 4.1 2.3 2.3 1.1 0.5 2.1 1.3 1.1 1.1 5.3 0.8 1.2 . 1.9 0.4 0.2 - 1.3 1.5 3.6 1.8 3.1 3.6 2.3 0.2 - 2.2 1.7 2.4 4.1 7.5 3.4 4.1 5.4 0.4 0.8 - 1.5 2.6 5.9 5.9 3.8 1.8 4.9 1.9 1.5 0.9 1.5 11.7 12.5 15.4 11.5 13.3 11.2 4.3 3.2 6.6 11.1 24.8 20.4 27.3 23.7 27.2 30.9 21.6 11.4 23.6 26.5 54.7 51.7 34.2 49.6 46.5 41.2 70.1 82.3 64.6 55.1 49 44 71 78 81 104 23 13 55 30 3.8 5.6 9.7 8.0 7.2 6.4 1.7 0.8 4.3 4.2 $1 512 $2 724 $1 512 $2 183 $2 178 $2 073 ... ... $1 435 $2 075 $1 406 $1 478 $1 235 $1 728 $1 033 $1 621 ... ... $954 $1 177 10.2 36.4 60.6 16.7 21.0 34.6 ... - - 13.3 2.96 5.36 2.61 4.19 3.30 4.32 218 3.33 19 29 45 63 49 72 18 9 10 20 5.34 1.82 2.71 2.78 3.53 14 26 33 40 37 60 10 - 10 16 ... 1.96 1.24 1.15 1.43 1.35 ... - .. . 10 22 43 16 56 31 8 9 - 8 5 15 39 16 38 31 8 9 - 8 1.49 • .. 2.87 4.03 5 12 27 16 29 27 -.4 - - 37.9 18.5 ... ... 1.30 - ... 1.45 1.37 - - - ... 49 44 71 78 81 104 23 13 55 30 61.2 34.1 29.6 12.8 33.3 10.6 ... 69.1 16.7 14 14 11 52 11 62 15 - 17 11 ... 86.5 ... 79.0 ... - ... ... 184 157 130 51 192 193 51 111 188 50 43.1 40.3 35.6 20.0 33.3 36.8 12.5 23.8 27.4 9.5 $1 090 5976 $1 013 $766 $971 $963 $768 $932 $735 $1 076 $697 $844 $786 $1 014 $838 $818 $1 085 $881 $1 063 $771 3.3 2.5 6.9 - 10.9 2.1 - - 2.1 77.7 60.5 53.8 66.7 53.1 75.1 23.5 37.8 64.4 28.0 329 393 315 378 459 642 130 147 308 150 6.6 12.0 11.0 10.5 9.8 10.2 2.3 2.3 6.0 5.8 57.1 32.1 34.9 11.1 35.1 24.9 9.2 25.2 52.6 12.7 57.4 29.8. 31.1 14.0 31.4 26.9 9.2 34.7 61.7 16.0 91.5 91.5 91.8 79.2 95.8 76.3 ... 62.7 78.4 50 148 67 159 144 239 41 16 9 48 68.0 62.2 31.3 78.0 22.2 51.0 68.3 - 58.3 192 139 133 99 179 248 40 75 191 69 12.1 14.6 15.2 9.1 13.2 13.7 2.5 3.7 10.5 5.9 146 86 52 40 68 120 27 34 21 13 $12 800 $13 200 $10 400 $18 100 $14 900 $16 800 $16 900 $37 700 46 53 81 59 111 128 13 41 170 56 $50 $96 $82 $127 $100 $89 ... $126 $97 $126 3.1 7.2 9.8 11.1 6.1 4.0 - - - 5.8 Balance of Ramsey County Troct Troct Tract Tract 0401 0402 0403.01 0403.02 629 577 631 1 645 11 - 5 14 13 11 9 - 5 5 10 11 16 23 5 11 15 14 6 17 9 13 8 24 18 47 15 17 11 60 5 44 44 44 17 62 53 61 43 101 115 50 146 255 115 91 107 459 154 97 183 486 31 37 72 139 19 24 - 5 $12 117 $10 420 $13 304 $13 742 $14 347 $15 171 $15 045 $14 891 708 758 692 1 783 511 443 $8 931 $12 449 $13 367 $13 348 $12 529 $14 113 $14 309 79 181 61 138 $6 125 $2 963 $3 833 $7 750 $5 397 $4 105 $4 466 $7 368 629 577 631 1 645 584 501 595 1578 $13 976 $12 148 $13 600 $13 829 63 68 67 198 $1 987 $22 981 $10 610 $8 115 9 7 4 9 113 147 84 88 $2 061 $1 673 $2 046 51 666 24 17 10 5 259 230 279 722 $1 739 $3 672 $1 793 El 326 1.7 0.9 1.6 0.9 1.4 - 1.4 0.6 1.7 0.6 0.8 2.4 0.9 1.7 0.6 0.8 2.8 - 1.6 11.8 10.4 7.9 4.7 25.4 25.1 22.7 26.6 55.8 58.2 64.0 64.8 24 15 23 27 3.8 2.6 3.6 1.6 ... ... ... El 494 ... ... ... $1 949 ... ... ... 3.52 10 9 14 21 4 5 9 12 .15 4 '5 21 10 4 5 21 12 24 1S 23 27 5 11 5 6 24 52 1$ 34 30.4 28.7 29.5 24.6 ... $807 ... $666 $966 ... $1 234 7.7 - - 78.8 - 105 109 103 129 3.8 4,9 4.0 1.7 23.8 30.3 23.3 - 25.7 37.6 24.3 - 70.4 68.3 80.0 - 36 40 40 48 - 42.5 57.5 - 43 53 32 46 6.5 7.8 4.7 2.6 18 31 23 20 ... $14 200 ... ... 25 22 9 26 $101 ... $142 16.3 9.4 - - 1 t 'Excludes inmates of institutions, members of the Armed Forces living in barrocks, college students in dormitories. and unrelated individuols under 14 years. P-140 MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL, MINN., SMSA A.8 - 20 CENSUS TRACTS Table H-1. Occupancy, Utilization, and Financial Characteristics of Housing Units: 1970-Continued [For minimum base for derived figures (percent, median, etc.) and meaning of symbols, see text] Census Tracts AM housing units Vacant- seasonal and migratory AN year-round housing units TENURE, RACE, AND VACANCY STATUS Owner occupied Cooperative and condominium White Negro __ Renter occupied .. White Negro Vacant year-round for sale only Vacant less than 6 months Median price osked For rent Vacant less thon 2 months Median rent asked Other LACKING SOME OR ALL PLUMBING FACILITIES AN ..its Owner occupied Negro Renter occupied Negro Vacant yenr-round For sale only _____ _______ ______________ For rent __ ____--_-----_--- COMPLETE KITCHEN FACIUTIES AND ACCESS Locking complete kitchen facilities Access only through other living quarters ROOMS 1 room 2 rooms ___________________ ________ _____ 3 rooms __ 4 rooms _. ________________________ 5 rooms 6 rooms 7 rooms ----'-_______ -----'__________________ 8rooms _______ ________------ _________ - 9 rooms or more.___ Median AN occupied housing units PERSONS 1 person _-'-------'--______ _'-________________ 2 persons__ 3 persons 4 persons 5 persons 6 persons or more Medron, all occupied units Median, owner occupied units Median, renter occupied units Units with roomers, boarders. or lodgers PERSONS PER ROOM 1.00 or less _ 1.01 to 1.50 1.51 or more Units with all plumbing facilities- 1.01 or more __ __ VALUE Specified .we.r .copied wits Less than $5,000 $5.000 to $7,499 $7,50010 $9,999 $10.000 to $14,999 $15,000 to $19,999 $20,000 to $24,999 $25,000 to $34,999 $35,000 to $49,999 $50.000 or more Median CONTRACT RENT SpecHi.d teeter .copied molts, Less than $30 $30 to $39 $40 to $59 $60 to $79 __ $80 to $99 $100 to $149 $150 to$199 $200 to $249-- ________________ $250 or more No cash rent Median St. Paul -Con. Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Trott Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract 0320 0321 0322 0323 0324 0325 0326 0327 0328 0329 0330 0331 0332 0333 0334 1 325 1 259 977 1 386 950 1 508 1 341 989 800 486 745 890 926 1 561 921 1 324 1 259 977 1 386 950 1 508 1 341 989 800 486 745 890 926 1 561 921 822 488 696 1 130 674 831 690 463 121 5 227 310 311 680 359 - 6 6 5 - 7 - 818 483 690 1 120 669 820 678 454 119 - 5 - 222 - 305 - 310 676 357 1 1 5 5 3 8 4 5 - 1 - 1 2 2 468 706 267 243 259 635 607 482 630 476 490 548 572 851 539 463 695 262 241 255 623 598 467 609 386 485 544 559 841 527 - 3 2 1 1 5 2 1 2 69 1 - 2 4 8 34 65 14 13 17 42 44 44 49 5 28 32 43 30 7 4 1 1 4 4 4 1 - - 1 2 1 - $18 800 - - 14 55 - 8 2 11 16 7 33 - 34 - 5 - 16 27 30 21 9 18 5 ... 7 13 4 27 20 5 14 17 18 19 $88 $163 $103 $78 $78 $78 $86 $76 $58 $58 $71 $107 $95 13 6 5 10 2 22 33 10 15 - 11 3 12 9 23 4 151 14 $80 4 31 117 45 20 18 61 100 83 112 4 30 110 126 140 32 8 13 16 10 7 30 17 19 4 - 5 8 5 18 3 20 96 - 29 9 10 30 75 54 - 97 - 4 - 22 - 94 110 - 116 - 78 3 - 8 1 1 1 8 10 11 - - - 3 - 8 - II 6 I 1 - 8 - - 1 1 1 8 - 4 - - I 7 - 4 - 4 - 1 3 68 8 5 5 9 28 50 46 1 7 53 85 32 6 5 4 4 3 2 3 1 3 2 1 1 1 2 4 3 18 115 16 7 2 6 16 48 89 19 64 71 116 106 5 51 103 25 22 11 24 61 25 148 37 69 60 95 118 71 226 245 88 110 111 180 171 88 229 85 155 174 168 266 17! 277 243 124 208 297 423 405 286 128 72 181 207 171 260 220 305 208 267 467 278 380 292 266 99 48 122 170 172 219 186 286 185 260 377 134 290 235 154 70 157 81 101 103 248 164 111 110 131 143 71 139 92 71 19 60 38 57 61 158 70 38 27 36 38 35 53 51 38 14 5 20 33 26 100 26 12 23 30 14 11 13 18 13 4 3 15 17 14 86 8 4.8 4.2 5.4 5.2 4.7 4.8 4.6 4.7 3.2 5.1 4.0 4.2 4.0 4.6 4 5 1 290 1 194 963 1 373 933 1 466 1 297 945 751 481 711 858 883 1 531 89e 290 479 192 280 169 302 305 238 363 125 282 296 323 499 287 474 353 320 441 332 488 401 261 210 70 178 241 266 441 298 219 148 155 203 142 245 201 159 77 38 98 118 111 185 142 131 94 118 170 125 199 148 124 36 57 62 76 79 129 65 86 65 83 123 78 100 113 69 30 52 32 46 59 109 51 90 55 95 156 87 132 129 94 35 139 65 81 45 168 55 2.2 1.8 2.4 24 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 1.6 3.6 1.9 2.1 1.9 2.1 2 0 2.5 2.4 2.6 2.6 2.5 2.6 2.5 2.6 2.2 4.0 2.7 2.5 2.4 3.3 24 1.9 1.4 2.1 1.9 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.3 1.4 3.6 1.5 1.8 1.6 1.6 1 8 50 53 38 21 9 51 35 25 20 7 20 20 45 50 29 1 244 1 163 911 1 289 873 1 381 1 198 867 709 394 678 788 839 1 460 869 38 22 41 75 55 73 82 66 25 73 26 44 30 62 21 8 9 11 9 5 12 17 12 17 14 13 26 14 9 8 44 28 50 84 59 83 95 73 38 85 37 60 40 67 29 727 374 610 1 041 577 615 509 315 79 5 140 179 250 539 305 1 - 1 - 6 - 11 1 - 2 _ 10 - - 3 8 6 44 22 8 - 9 6 1 3 2 33 5 17 16 33 27 107 56 9 2 14 13 8 3 11 207 104 162 236 205 257 247 162 41 2 54 74 55 85 107 330 195 306 592 227 266 92 69 18 - 51 64 119 235 153 120 57 108 174 86 52 6 4 3 1 10 21 44 115 27 22 12 15 20 11 7 2 I - - - 1 21 76 4 4 1 1 - 1 - - - - - - _ 2 17 - - - - - - - 5 1 $16 500 $17 100 516 900 $17 300 $15 800 $15 300 $11 800 $12 500 $12 700 $10 600 $14 200 $14 800 $17 300 $18 900 $15 800 466 705 266 242 259 633 607 481 630 471 487 547 572 851 539 2 13 1 3 2 3 10 9 6 8 5 17 9 3 1 19 5 2 2 7 18 3 31 69 105 16 32 17 15 62 17 9 23 46 94 78 132 96 124 90 72 89 79 55 144 48 45 61 156 221 197 162 171 118 119 137 '35 ;02 114 204 60 76 72 189 170 110 212 108 75 138 146 161 185 203 195 97 76 78 203 73 75 71 19 45 125 121 282 187 58 52 16 21 12 16 2 - 2 - 6 23 36 113 to 2 2 - 1 - - - - - - - 10 28 - 2 - 1 - 1 4 1 • 16 12 22 - 9 8 13 - 19 - 9 - 14 - 9 19 8 19 ,2 $109 $88 $96 $95 $89 $89 576 $75 $78 $72 $61 $83 $84 $102 593 'Limited to one.family homes on less than 10 acres and no business on property. ,Excludes one -family homes on 10 acres or more. CENSUS TRACTS A.8- 21 MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL, MINN., SMS" II --29 Table H-1. Occupancy, Utilization, and Financial Characteristics of Housing Units: 1970-Continued [For minimum base for derived figures (percent, median, etc.) and meaning of symbols, see text] Census Tracts AN housing units Vacant- seasonal and migratory AN Tour -round housing units_ TENURE, RACE, AND VACANCY STATUS Owner occupied Cooperative and condominium White __________ Negro Renter occupied White--------- ------------------' Negro Vacant year-round For sole only Vacant less than 6 months Medan price asked For rent ________ Vacant bus than 2 months__________ Median rent asked Other LACKING SOME OR ALL PLUMBING FACILITIES All ..its__ Owner occupied Negro Renter occupied Negro Vacant year-round For sole only For rent COMPLETE KITCHEN FACILITIES AND ACCESS locking complete kitchen facilities Access only through other living quorters ROOMS 1 room 2 rooms _-------- 3 rooms 4 rooms 5 rooms 6 rooms 7 rooms 8 rooms 9 rooms or more Median AN occupied loosing units_____________ PERSONS 1 person 2 persons 3 persons 4 persons ------______ 5 persons 6 persons or more Median, all occupied units Median. owner occupied units Median, renter occupied units _________ ________ Units with roomers, boarders. or lodgers PERSONS PER ROOM 1.00 or less ____ _____________ 1.01 to 1.50 1.51 or more Units with all plumbing facilities- 1.01 or more VALUE Specified .wool occupied nest' Less than $5,000 _ 55,000 to 57,499 57,500 to 59,999 $10,000 to 514,999 $15,000 to $19,999 $20,000 to $24,999_______ $25,000 to $34,999 $35,000 to $49,999 $50,000 or more Median CONTRACT RENT Speifbd reefer .cc.pi.d suits, Less than 530 $30 to 539 540 to 559 $60 to 579 $80to599________ 5100 to 5149 $150 to $199 5200 to 5249 5250 or more No cash rent Median St. Paul -Con. Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Troct Tract Tract Troct Tract Tract Troct Tract Tract 0335 0336 0337 0338 0339 0340 0342 0344 0345 0346 0347 0348 0349 0350 0351 1 311 697 698 831 973 1 400 1 SS6 1 049 1 532 2 $35 2 230 812 1 391 1 175 1 120 3 1 311 697 696 831 973 1 400 1 SS6 1 089 1 532 2 $32 2 230 812 1 391 1 175 1 120 634 173 66 366 170 78 8 417 982 1 862 1 660 523 756 621 584 7 5 120 73 - 59 - 82 - 59 - 59 - 7 414 979 1 861 1 658 521 - 753 - 618 - 582 508 98 6 281 111 16 1 1 - 2 614 458 484 413 620 1 126 1 421 626 519 931 521 270 - 605 540 523 326 232 358 102 274 890 1 380 619 515 923 513 270 598 531 506 280 211 105 309 329 200 16 3 1 - 3 1 11 63 66 148 52 183 196 127 46 31 39 49 19 30 14 13 6 2 - 9 4 - - 3 1 3 7 1 6 2 1 5 ... - 8 ... - - ... ... ... 7 ... 5 ... ... - ... ... - - ... ... ... $23 800 ... 23 21 144 19 99 166 123 38 17 18 33 7 13 5 2 11 6 8 13 50 152 106 28 13 14 32 6 12 3 578 562 552 586 564 560 565 588 588 570 $159 $115 5204 585 34 43 4 24 80 30 4 5 13 18 9 11 11 7 10 38 47 33 SO 285 311 626 140 56 23 22 11 21 21 7 12 6 4 7 11 9 - 10 17 10 15 4 6 6 3 5 2 - 3 6 1 - - - - - - - - 19 41 28 35 200 251 531 120 35 13 7 6 15 15 4 9 18 - 22 82 37 9 - - - ... - - 7 - 1 8 74 51 97 10 4 - - 1 - - - - 6 - -- - - - - - 2 - - - 2 46 50 96 9 2 - - - - 15 10 10 11 29 53 743 17 8 5 7 6 12 7 5 3 3 1 1 1 3 5 1 2 3 1 - 1 2 127 56 9 19 124 178 1 167 50 21 53 37 19 13 16 9 85 83 241 46 144 293 230 92 41 107 57 20 48 38 35 88 109 167 99 180 440 100 226 167 378 211 121 183 165 195 217 107 125 118 160 231 26 223 322 654 512 83 247 122 147 317 152 87 237 178 163 20 215 381 819 781 100 235 213 184 252 96 45 133 81 54 4 137 327 513 391 136 270 216 220 142 37 13 89 43 25 4 87 159 217 162 129 197 191 144 56 38 9 59 32 6 45 71 73 62 77 112 97 109 27 19 2 31 31 10 5 14 43 18 17 127 86 117 77 4.9 4.4 3.1 5.1 3.7 3.0 1.2 4.3 5.1 4.8 4.9 6.0 5.4 5./ 5.4 1 248 631 550 779 790 1 204 1 429 1 043 1 501 2 793 2 161 793 1 361 1 161 1 107 424 250 234 168 357 679 1 274 339 296 597 239 206 372 264 326 344 139 155 214 192 289 134 239 420 835 638 263 418 331 333 149 63 72 116 79 104 12 152 238 455 365 93 188 149 137 124 60 37 87 56 58 3 129 211 380 379 92 140 120 103 86 36 25 69 37 40 5 87 129 233 252 50 98 86 77 121 83 27 125 69 34 1 97 207 293 308 89 145 211 131 2.1 2.0 1.8 2.6 1.7 1.4 1.1 2.3 2.6 2.5 3.1 2.2 2.2 2.5 2.2 2.7 2.3 2.3 3.2 2.3 1.9 2.1 3.2 3.1 3.1 3.6 3.0 3.2 4.0 3.1 1.5 1.7 1.7 2.3 1.5 1.4 1.1 1.8 2.1 1.7 2.1 1.4 1.6 1.9 1.6 56 33 15 30 32 46 17 22 30 39 38 8 23 52 22 1 173 565 526 706 727 1 146 1 378 964 1 380 2 611 1 971 774 1 330 1 094 1 079 56 50 19 56 42 37 2 67 104 159 178 15 24 57 26 19 16 5 17 21 21 49 12 17 23 32 4 7 10 2 71 65 24 72 45 47 27 77 119 180 208 17 30 65 27 513 100 32 254 87 26 7 284 774 1 756 1 621 505 676 526 511 1 1 - 1 - - - 6 3 - - - - 7 3 - 2 2 - - 4 15 20 3 - 1 - 1 20 17 3 13 10 12 44 43 20 4 - 4 229 58 17 125 49 14 3 102 300 336 175 16 41 53 42 191 15 6 88 21 8 117 298 602 583 42 181 196 133 42 4 4 19 5 2 1 34 94 485 548 73 239 152 161 20 2 2 5 - 1 - 12 16 231 259 155 155 80 134 3 - - 1 - 1 1 3 1 30 31 148 37 30 31 2 - - 6 2 71 18 17 5 515 000 - $11 800 513 300 - 514 500 $13 300 - 514 500 522 500 515 900 515 300 519 000 $20 300 532 800 522 300 520 500 $22 300 612 453 484 411 620 1 122 1 421 626 519 930 520 270 60S 539 523 11 9 2 2 10 20 73 5 11 17 1 - 6 1 4 45 74 36 4 49 78 97 11 4 120 1 1 5 16 3 71 112 102 45 178 312 295 110 36 102 8 6 10 13 5 131 141 95 111 203 366 407 167 116 42 4 23 27 67 31 170 71 43 137 124 211 200 153 132 79 31 57 148 172 97 112 40 121 105 48 123 254 150 184 384 241 104 292 211 217 16 1 75 2 1 5 45 12 23 161 203 41 81 35 110 14 - - - - 8 1 - 9 12 13 24 11 26 27 9 - 1 3 1 14 2 6 7 15 - 5 - 10 - 5 - 7 7 33 17 12 13 18 11 10 7 23 584 564 581 585 $67 567 571 581 591 5115 $145 5115 $112 5100 $1171 'Limited to one-fomity homes on less than 10 acres and no business on property. 'Excludes one -family homes on 10 acres or more. N-30 MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL, MINN., SMSA . •A.8- 22 CENSUS TRACTS Table H-1. Occupancy, Utilization, and Financial Characteristics of Housing Units: 1970-Continued (For minimum base for derived figures (percent, median, etc.) and meaning of symbols, see text) Census Tracts All housing units Vacant -seasonal and migratory All year-round housing units TENURE, RACE, AND VACANCY STATUS Owner occupied Cooperative and condominium White Negro Renter occupied White Negro Vacant year-round __________ For sale only Vacant less than 6 months Median price asked For rent Vacant less than 2 months Median rent asked ______ Other LACKING SOME OR ALL PLUMBING FACILITIES AN units________ Owner occupied Negro Renter occupied Negro Vacant year-round For sale only For rent COMPLETE KITCHEN FACILITIES AND ACCESS Lacking complete kitchen facilities_ Access only through other living quarters ROOMS 1 room 2 rooms ________________ ____________ 3 rooms 4 rooms __ 5 rooms --___ __ ___________'-----____________ 6 rooms 7 rooms 8 rooms 9 rooms or more Median All occupied housing units PERSONS 1 person 2 persons 3 persons 4 persons 5 persons 6 persons or more Median, all occupied units Median, owner occupied units Median, renter occupied units Units with roomers, boarders, or lodgers PERSONS PER ROOM 1.00 or less 1.01 to 1.50 1.51 or more Units with all plumbing facilities - 1.01 or more VALUE Spxifid owner occupied wilts, Less than $5,000 $5,000 to $7,499 $7,500 to $9,999 $10,000 to $14,999 $15,000 to $19,999 $20,000 to $24,999 $25,000 to $34,999 $35,000 to $49,999 $50,000 or more Median CONTRACT RENT Specified renter occupied units� Less than $30 $30 to $39 $40 to $59 $60 to $79 $80 to $99 $100 to $149 $150 to $199 $200 to $249 $250 or more No cash rent Median St. Paul- Con. Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract 0352 0353 0354 0355 0356 0357 0358 0359 0360 0361 0362 0363 0364 0365 0366 1 621 1 955 1 318 1 881 980 1 121 1 906 726 845 741 2 048 1 253 1 710 1 846 1 682 - 1 - - 1 - - - 1 - - 1 621 1 955 1 318 1 881 979 1 121 1 906 725 845 741 2 048 1 253 1 709 1 846 1 682 915 1 065 432 150 256 663 330 166 267 205 1 373 976 1 363 1 267 1 313 - 16 6 - 12 - 5 11 - 8 5 911 1 020 344 142 - 251 657 326 163 266 205 1 370 975 - 1 363 1 266 1 310 3 43 81 7 4 1 3 - - 1 1 - 2 688 861 747 1 476 671 440 1 471 510 545 507 639 265 333 - 530 350 672 842 556 1 326 662 437 1 399 487 531 493 636 265 333 527 349 9 14 166 112 3 - 47 1 1 4 - - 3 18 29 139 255 52 18 105 49 33 29 36 12 13 49 19 4 1 14 2 3 - - - - - 6 3 3 5 3 ... ... 9 ... ... - - - - - 5 ... 4 ... ... ... $15 900 - ... - - - - - $20 000 ... ... $18 800 7 12 100 182 24 3 81 27 23 8 22 2 5 31 3 4 10 62 82 21 ... 72 21 17 4 19 ... 4 1 ... $125 $87 $64 $63 $90 ... $80 $56 $71 $67 $175 ... $135 $191 ... 7 16 25 71 25 15 24 22 10 21 8 7 5 13 13 39 21 161 421 48 19 249 129 180 8 5 9 15 6 10 10 3 10 29 - 14 - 113 - 327 - 30 - 9 - 209 108 154 - - 36 9 - 8 2 2 39 79 12 - 30 18 16 - 1 - 2 - - 37 51 4 - 21 - 13 11 52 95 11 27 39 15 10 28 7 21 28 12 37 65 4 6 - 11 - 3 5 2 - - - - - 2 30 2 20 88 27 12 112 59 26 22 11 1 2 6 5 2 5 4 2 4 2 5 3 1 3 - - 2 1 2 32 30 39 400 41 20 189 110 74 6 56 5 3 7 3 41 100 131 388 75 33 274 92 74 47 79 10 18 34 9 212 354 222 528 219 124 480 113 156 202 208 120 159 266 98 225 277 238 286 204 92 389 146 203 135 236 127 183 362 296 354 342 198 126 125 110 149 152 157 127 496 315 465 588 521 312 399 196 71 111 186 122 73 116 126 448 337 453 366 373 233 242 114 33 63 179 81 21 34 56 294 211 275 166 196 119 127 97 24 33 129 60 12 17 20 141 87 102 41 98 93 84 83 25 108 248 162 6 14 22 90 41 51 16 88 5.3 5.1 4.6 2.8 4.3 6.5 3.5 3.8 4.1 4.4 5.4 5.6 5.6 4.9 5.3 1 603 1 926 1 179 1 626 927 1 103 1 801 676 812 712 2 012 1 241 1 696 1 797 1 663 449 614 337 975 390 285 879 303 284 244 546 259 347 453 267 464 543 260 331 268 281 517 160 236 142 686 432 593 658 644 223 227 194 123 100 138 192 73 114 78 295 170 239 271 291 159 180 127 66 53 120 95 63 75 55 233 148 233 183 205 136 146 93 44 32 106 52 30 33 56 135 106 145 110 110 172 216 168 87 84 173 66 47 70 137 117 126 139 122 146 2.3 2.1 2.5 1.3 1.8 2.4 1.5 1.7 2.0 2.3 2.2 2.3 2.3 2.2 2.4 3.0 3.0 3.4 2.4 3.3 3.6 2.5 2.3 2.4 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.4 2.5 1.7 1.4 2.1 1.3 1.4 1.7 1.4 1.4 1.8 2.1 1.4 1.5 1.7 1.5 2.0 56 48 70 49 28 25 77 21 37 13 26 24 25 37 23 1 552 1 857 1 094 1 511 908 1 081 1 762 620 758 596 1 977 1 212 1 655 1 751 1 593 44 65 69 74 14 21 30 44 40 90 28 26 39 44 57 7 4 16 41 5 1 9 12 14 26 7 3 2 2 13 49 68 81 100 17 21 32 49 48 110 33 29 41 46 69 815 913 283 56 176 567 196 113 169 120 1 294 947 1 290 1 213 1 276 1 1 - - - 2 - 1 - 2 - 2 - 2 1 2 - 1 - - 2 11 13 8 2 1 1 3 4 7 8 9 10 1 - 3 15 32 14 5 5 8 21 27 75 163 79 27 15 22 18 53 82 51 56 52 137 174 182 308 441 134 13 33 107 18 24 36 32 243 261 443 535 461 214 195 46 1 46 148 24 4 6 6 394 284 394 324 249 150 75 12 4 48 166 48 - 6 365 239 236 132 149 46 18 1 - 19 99 50 3 - 1 130 76 67 21 97 12 11 - - 14 25 33 1 1 99 27 4 1 107 $20 300 $18 300 $17 000 $13 600 $24 200 $25 400 $31 900 $12 000 $12 600 - $13 600 $24 300 $22 700 $20 700 $18 900 $19 600 686 861 743 1 476 671 439 1 471 510 544 506 639 265 333 529 350 5 3 9 36 4 3 19 4 16 6 1 - 2 4 2 7 3 14 173 9 14 44 15 30 78 6 2 2 2 2 18 25 121 372 20 16 186 158 131 131 41 4 2 6 4 108 131 187 417 135 53 267 165 189 169 44 19 16 18 10 154 311 209 236 264 71 405 99 100 74 59 106 64 101 32 272 275 174 191 188 172 368 38 50 32 222 102 141 199 139 82 87 12 14 25 68 77 18 16 2 62 14 69 104 22 13 5 - 6 3 18 38 - - - 16 8 23 65 18 8 6 - 7 2 8 20 - 165 - 1 4 111 • 19 15 17 24 21 16 47 13 12 14 23 10 13 26 10 $109 $97 $82 $67 $92 $111 $89 $68 $70 $63 $130 $99 $128 $123 9144 'Limited to one -family homes on less than 10 acres and no business on property. ,Excludes one -family homes on 10 acres or more. CENSUS TRACTS A.8-23 MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL, MINN., SMSA H-31 Table H-1. Occupancy, Utilization, and Financial Characteristics of Housing Units: 1970-Continued [For minimum base for derived figures (percent, median, etc.) and meaning of symbols, see text] Census Tracts AN housing calks Vacant -seasonal and migrotory AN year -roved hewing waits TENURE, RACE, AND VACANCY STATUS Owner occupied Cooperative and condominium White Negro __________ Renter occupied White Negro Vacant year-round for sale only Vacant less thon 6 months____ Medion price asked For rent Vacant less than 2 months Median rent asked Other LACKING SOME OR ALL PLUMBING FACILITIES AI emits__ owner occupied Negro Renter occupied Negro Vacant year-round For sale only For rent COMPLETE KITCHEN FACILITIES AND ACCESS Lacking complete kitchen facilities Access only through other living quarters ROOMS 1 room _-----"'-------'---------------- 2 rooms 3 rooms 4 roams 5 rooms__________________________________ 6 rooms 7 rooms 8 rooms 9 rooms or more Median AN occupied hw:iup twits PERSONS 1 person 2 persons 3 persons______________ 4 persons 5 persons ----- ----'6 persons or more _ Median, all occupied units Median, owner occupied units __________ Median, renter occupied units Units with roomers, boarders, or lodgers PERSONS PER ROOM 1.00 or less 1.01 to 1.50__ 1.51 or more Units with all plumbing facilities-1.01 or more VALUE Sp ]lied ewow eccgMd mks, Less than $5.000 $5,000 to $7,499 $7,500 to $9.999 $10,000 to $14,999 $15,000 to $19,999 $20,000 to $24,999 $25.000 to $34,999 $35,000 to 549.999 $50,000 or more Median CONTRACT RENT Spociled peter occupied oohs, Less than $30 $30 to $39 940 to $59 $60 to $79 $80 to $99 $100to$149 $150 to $199 _ $200 to $249 $250 or more No cosh rent Median St. Poul-Con. Tract Tract Troct Tract Troct Tract Tract Troct Tract Tract 0367 0368 0369 0370 0371 0372 0374 0375 0376.01 0376.02 1 784 1 093 1 0S3 1 176 1 608 2 067 1 662 2 109 1 887 1 183 - 1 1 784 1 093 1 053 1 176 1 608 2 066 1 662 2 109 1 187 1 183 1 198 737 605 818 877 1 256 1 014 1 573 1 032 162 11 1 195 - 737 600 - 813 877 1 246 1 011 1 569 - 1 029 159 - - 4 1 - 1 1 465 328 413 338 691 763 578 513 827 997 463 327 410 335 684 750 573 511 819 961 1 1 2 2 2 1 30 121 - 28 35 20 40 47 70 23 28 24 2 1 3 1 6 2 4 3 2 - ... 5 - 113 12 15 9 22 19 60 13 16 15 112 8 15 4 10 16 31 8 15 15 550 $80 556 $158 $80 $106 $215 $137 5156 $141 6 15 17 10 12 26 6 7 10 9 22 37 71 19 57 S4 9 10 28 15 11 16 14 8 15 25 9 9 17 4 11 - 20 46 11 - 41 28 - - - 1 - 11 - 10 - - 1 - 11 - - 1 1 - - - - - - 1 6 - 1 - 3 17 24 3 10 6 2 1 5 2 3 2 1 3 2 - - 1 - 6 12 29 1 11 13 14 23 40 26 108 21 35 17 82 62 41 28 83 71 262 143 127 104 229 303 187 230 355 385 348 215 281 179 256 488 258 328 340 534 484 253 244 305 402 518 357 404 561 108 312 227 175 327 355 407 344 408 281 40 162 130 100 159 161 173 278 304 143 17 70 65 47 69 84 71 123 189 56 1 32 27 15 15 28 31 60 195 28 1 4.8 5.1 4.7 5.4 5.1 4.8 5.4 5.6 4.7 3.7 1 663 1 06S 1 018 1 156 1 568 2 019 1 592 2 086 1 859 1 159 366 257 276 212 413 411 167 376 559 391 522 306 296 379 418 613 463 665 466 363 249 165 163 176 253 298 227 334 258 210 197 116 111 145 173 269 292 336 280 142 134 90 63 93 125 167 223 184 154 36 195 131 109 151 186 261 220 191 142 17 2.4 2.4 2.3 2.5 2.4 2.5 3.2 2.5 2.3 2.0 2.8 2.8 2.4 2.7 2.9 3.0 3.9 3.1 3.5 2.4 1.7 1.8 2.1 2.1 1.9 2.1 2.2 1.6 1.3 2.0 26 24 25 14 27 36 39 18 17 25 1 552 992 933 1 079 1 463 1 832 1 522 2 057 1 779 1 113 99 61 76 69 93 159 59 26 65 41 12 12 9 8 12 28 11 3 15 5 111 73 81 76 103 182 70 29 78 46 1 100 604 476 708 698 1 057 969 1 519 1 012 149 4 4 7 2 1 3 3 - 2 21 16 27 8 9 24 2 - 2 3 58 47 89 23 32 79 5 1 5 10 339 259 217 215 218 364 43 17 47 42 393 226 119 310 279 387 101 100 286 54 173 46 12 109 117 144 175 297 392 14 78 5 4 32 33 50 398 526 206 20 28 1 1 7 9 4 212 328 58 4 6 2 - 2 30 250 16 $16 400 $14 600 $12 500 - 916 600 $16 500 $15 700 $28 900 $31 500 $22 100 $16 30C 463 328 412 338 690 762 576 512 823 994 5 3 5 3 5 7 2 1 - i 39 4 9 3 10 1 - 83 i 49 17 75 18 46 53 2 - 58 1 47 99 127 60 194 154 5 7 7 17 86 77 104 84 233 160 7 12 52 11i 191 100 72 96 165 290 73 301 427 634 20 9 2 33 26 73 291 154 174 211 2 - 1 16 3 - 60 14 12 I - 16 1 - 124 2 - 23 19 - 17 12 14 15 11 21 10 1 $99 $87 $78 $100 $91 $99 $183 $139 5129 $13: Balance of Romsey County Tract Tract Tract Tract 0401 0402 0403.01 0403.02 744 723 691 1 761 11 6 10 - 733 717 681 1 761 618 516 587 1 446 616 - 516 - 583 - 1 440 2 - 95 191 - 87 290 94 190 87 290 20 - 10 - 7 - 25 3 3 2 3 8 5 $160 17 5 14 23 15 9 1S 16 9 8 15 4 - 6 - 1 - 3 - - 7 5 1 1 1 5 4 6 1 8 17 3 27 37 71 28 79 133 126 85 154 189 166 214 444 174 148 151 456 100 91 90 293 50 48 63 200 37 46 41 107 5.5 5.3 5.5 5.9 713 707 674 1 736 59 134 52 69 150 213 163 212 113 120 127 282 131 86 127 449 98 55 98 355 162 99 107 369 3.8 2.6 3.5 4.2 3.8 2.8 3.7 4.5 3.3 2.1 2.1 2.4 12 8 6 10 611 656 632 1 602 85 40 38 119 17 11 4 15 99 50 42 132 573 468 S82 1 437 3 5 - 11 8 2 1 32 19 4 - 138 118 43 15 121 118 133 196 103 72 148 520 96 74 163 574 43 26 63 117 26 28 26 14 $19 300 $18 500 $23 700 $24 900 83 191 87 290 - 2 1 I - 1 - 9 6 15 32 5 - I1 48 13 4 22 61 18 139 16 17 43 122 5 6 3 16 - 3 - 1 5 15 4 7 $122 $100 $155 $149 'Limited to one -family homes on less thon 10 o res and no business on property. .Excludes one -family homes on 10 acres or more. H-32 MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL, MINN., SMSA A.8-24 CENSUS TRACTS Table H-2. Structural, Equipment, and Financial Characteristics of Housing Units: 1970-Continued [Doto hosed on sample, we text. For minimum base for derived figures (percent, median, etc.) and meaning of symbols, see text) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Census Tracts AR yr-►evnd boosiag wilts UNITS IN STRUCTURE 1 (includes mobile home or troil-r) 2 3 and 4 5 to 49 50 or more YEAR STRUCTURE BUILT 1969 to March 1970 1965 to 1968 1960 to 1964 1950 to 1959 1940 to 1949 1939 or earlier HEATING EQUIPMENT Steam or hot water Warm air furnace ____________ Built-in electric units Floor, wall, or pipeless furnace Other means or not heated BASEMENT All units with basement One -family houses with basement SELECTED EQUIPMENT With more than 1 bathroom With public water supply With public sewer With oir conditioning Room unit(s) ____ Central system All occupied housing volts YEAR MOVED INTO UNIT 1968 to March 1970 1963 to 1967___________________________________ 1960 to 1964 -- -- ---- -- -- ------ --- 1950 to 1959_____________________ 1949 or earlier__ AUTOMOBILES AVAILABLE 3 or more None GROSS RENT Specified rester *resided welts' Less than 540 $40 to $59'_________________________________ ____ $60 to $79__________ 580 to 599 $100to$149 $150 to $199._____ $200 to $249_________________________ 5250 or more No cosh rent Median GROSS RENT AS PERCENTAGE OF INCOME BY INCOME Specified rester eccepled emits Less than $5,000 Less than 20 percent 20 to 24 percent 25 to 34 percent 35 percent or more Not computed Median $5,000 to 59,999 Less than 20 percent 20 to 24 percent 25 to 34 percent 35 percent or more________ Not computed Median $10,000 t0 $14,999 25 percent or more Not computed Median $15,000 or more 25 percent or more Not computed Median St. Foul -Con. Tract Tract Tract Troct Trott Tract Tract Tract Tract Trott Tract Tract Troct Trott Tract 0320 0321 0322 0323 0324 0325 0326 0327 0328 0329 0330 0331 0332 0333 0334 1 290 1 259 977 1 346 950 1 Sot 1 341 989 801 485 740 895 925 1 S62 921 797 402 684 1 103 615 661 651 403 139 69 156 235 276 588 39 163 226 161 193 247 595 463 358 94 63 241 320 136 209 12 84 144 98 38 35 140 141 165 66 140 80 135 129 156 9 246 461 34 52 . 53 112 86 63 403 41 48 205 384 609 31 - 26 - - - - - - 99 172 215 - - - 4 18 - - 5 - - - 5 18 6 15 96 40 - 17 10 27 - 4 10 16 16 27 103 79 25 7 30 41 30 12 14 18 64 205 19 34 80 2 87 10 12 100 112 44 9 6 38 355 - 35 41 64 2! 101 123 55 68 65 49 56 15 14 24 16 46 101 27 4. 923 1 043 903 1 171 717 1 358 1 264 954 727 32 498 761 716 1 273 81 583 912 616 668 253 788 354 353 599 155 212 456 597 1 105 62( 604 300 337 671 570 578 610 363 121 288 234 285 267 383 23( 11 14 - 23 15 8 3 5 6 65 23 12 30 1( 26 9 4 25 6 37 43 49 - 103 11 17 14 I 66 24 20 22 98 90 326 221 76 36 126 120 32 30 3) 1 218 1 247 977 1 358 940 1 486 1 293 969 789 350 683 868 892 1 489 881 781 402 684 1 091 615 655 621 397 139 69 152 235 271 588 39( 243 151 162 259 175 276 212 131 40 38 120 112 123 391 94 1 295 1 259 977 1 386 950 1 508 1 341 989 822 464 738 897 904 1 583 921 1 295 1 259 977 1 386 950 1 508 1 335 983 822 464 732 897 898 1 583 921 489 435 342 509 297 393 189 139 80 17 123 219 298 578 31: 462 427 328 467 254 393 189 135 80 17 108 219 265 578 30C 27 8 14 42 43 - - 4 - - 15 - 33 - 1? 1 254 1 194 963 1 373 933 1 466 1 297 94S 772 460 710 86S 876 1 S38 891 438 493 214 256 180 414 422 296 334 197 240 353 413 456 301 163 185 130 170 81 229 211 148 141 112 158 140 127 337 135 188 139 163 200 215 220 154 112 112 101 145 141 75 261 144 228 213 166 350 244 255 212 156 89 50 83 102 66 222 142 237 164 290 397 213 348 298 233 96 - 84 129 195 262 17C 804 578 538 782 519 820 722 462 326 94 266 525 478 761 505 264 162 201 291 217 246 175 140 45 27 98 89 193 322 129 51 33 55 76 15 70 57 24 15 - 30 13 26 93 34 135 421 169 224 182 330 343 319 386 339 316 238 179 362 226 433 706 267 243 259 631 607 482 634 460 494 539 611 812 539 - 5 - - 6 5 31 64 117 16 27 35 5 6 63 19 10 24 33 48 113 79 79 64 67 38 25 58 122 40 21 31 92 134 99 132 22 67 89 101 142 62 94 159 54 44 63 182 219 175 212 59 87 93 132 133 145 184 257 101 132 135 272 198 139 126 224 117 193 201 286 225 80 81 27 13 15 43 13 12 6 12 21 48 62 122 48 7 9 6 13 - 6 - 4 - - - 15 I1 40 5 - 6 4 10 20 - 5 6 10 14 6 21 10 10 24 5112 5100 5104 5115 5107 5101 591 588 584 5101 576 599 594 5113 5103 433 706 267 243 259 631 607 442 634 440 494 S39 611 812 S39 110 327 89 49 84 256 266 207 375 314 283 194 226 344 199 5 26 7 - 10 - 5 16 50 - 5 16 27 33 15 16 16 5 5 5 34 37 24 51 36 33 11 17 37 5 20 103 31 13 10 45 47 63 80 88 85 32 71 64 71 69 177 40 31 50 165 165 99 171 185 143 120 111 195 90 - 5 6 9 12 12 5 23 5 17 15 15 18 35.0+ 35.0+ 34.5 35.0+ 35.0+ 35.0+ 35.0+ 34.7 34.4 35.0+ 35.0+ 35.0+ 34.7 35.0+ 34.9 175 285 119 100 101 215 243 178 181 120 122 227 260 280 222 99 146 75 59 78 141 203 127 150 31 81 162 180 142 114 42 61 24 23 23 33 21 30 19 40 27 48 49 67 67 25 56 6 18 - 35 11 17 12 49 14 6 21 66 25 5 12 - - 6 3 4 - - - 5 5 4 10 14 5 - 6 10 5 11 18.9 19.5 17.7 18.8 17.4 18.1 16.0 14.9 16.3 23.6 16.8 16.3 16.2 19.6 19.3 110 89 53 83 51 117 75 77 60 19 62 93 93 118 95 - - - - - - - - - 5 - - 5 13.4 12.4 14.5 13.1 11.6 11.7 10.7 10.0- 11.2 11.7 11.2 12.9 15.6 12.7 38 5 6 11 23 43 23 20 18 7 27 25 32 70 23 - - - - - - - - - - 6 - - - - 11.5 ... 10.0- ... ... ... ... 10.0- 10.0- 11.0 'Excludes one -family homes on 10 ocres or more. CENSUS TRACTS A.8 - 25 MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL, MINN., SMSA H-65 Table H-2. Structural, Equipment, and Financial Characteristics of Housing Units: 1970-Continued (Dots based on sample, see text. For minimum base for derived figures (percent, median, etc.) and meaning of symbols, see text( Census Tracts AN year-round housing units UNITS IN STRUCTURE 1 (includes mobile home or trailer) 2 3 and 4 5 to 49 50 or more________ YEAR STRUCTURE BUILT 1969 to March 1970 1965 to 1968 1960 to 1964 1950 to 1959 1940 to 1949 1939 or earlier______________________________ HEATING EQUIPMENT Steam or hot water__________ Worm air furnace Built-in electric units Floor, wall, or pipeless furnace Other means or not heated BASEMENT All units with basement One-fomily houses with basement SELECTED EQUIPMENT With more than 1 bothroom .... . With public water supply With public sewer With air conditioning Room unit(s) Central system All occupied housing units YEAR MOVED INTO UNIT 1968 to March 1970 1965 to 1967 1960 to 1964 1950 to 1959 1949 or earlier__ AUTOMOBILES AVAILABLE 1 2 3 or more None_______________ GROSS RENT Specified renter steepled u.01' Less than 540 540 to 559 $60 to $79 580 to 599 $100 to 5149---'__-___'--------------------" $150 to 5199 5200 to 5249 $250ormore__ _______________ No cosh rent Medion____________________ GROSS RENT AS PERCENTAGE OF INCOME BY INCOME Specified reefer occupied e.Ns'____________ Less than 55,000 Less than 20 percent 20 to 24 percent 25 to 34 percent 35 percent or more Not computed Median _ $5,000 to 59.999 Less than 20 percent 20 to 24 percent 25 to 34 percent 35 percent or more Not computed Median $10,000 to 514,999 25 percent or more Nat computed Median $15,000 or more________________ 25 percent or more Not computed Medion St. Poul - Con. Tract Tract lract Tract Tract Tract Tract Troct Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Troct 0335 0336 0337 0338 0339 0340 0342 0344 0345 0346 0347 0348 0349 0350 0351 1 311 710 685 831 1 049 1 324 1 585 1 060 1 532 2 835 2 230 838 1 365 1 175 1 120 648 179 49 350 170 109 22 289 887 1 879 1 .95 566 716 579 581 300 256 68 254 280 69 - 328 457 195 79 45 146 168 144 58 42 36 69 197 108 - 145 77 37 10 10 67 145 52 102 103 325 158 402 1 032 519 298 111 522 436 217 436 283 343 203 130 207 - - 6 1 044 - - 202 10 - - - - - 9 261 - - 24 62 16 - 181 60 - 9 - - 61 31 93 18 22 111 292 13 28 206 278 14 25 - 43 177 142 116 6 - - 105 21 69 379 329 50 43 4 48 68 3 25 4 11 5 16 50 71 771 864 154 55 10 51 54 6 19 70 42 121 - 37 61 264 320 51 85 58 42 951 519 171 733 974 1 063 1 110 923 1 303 1 034 379 569 1 148 1 103 936 656 337 313 563 805 1 016 1 373 709 634 767 360 639 1 152 1 054 937 510 207 232 193 157 141 62 230 685 1 821 1 821 183 186 92 107 16 43 104 23 12 118 128 5 15 89 18 5 18 - 6 - 15 23 15 21 13 12 8 44 45 6 - 5 47 129 108 13 37 54 36 10 108 154 113 25 11 4 29 23 1 271 705 648 823 1 041 1 304 1 318 1 039 1 491 2 613 2 135 787 1 338 1 175 1 083 648 179 49 350 170 103 16 289 857 1 864 1 692 548 711 579 577 271 80 18 81 153 92 5 150 310 590 593 429 392 348 371 1 308 723 665 819 1 063 1 302 1 593 1 046 1 532 2 828 2 224 840 1 363 1 175 1 120 1 311 723 658 812 1 063 1 302 1 599 1 039 1 532 2 828 2 225 840 1 363 1 170 1 120 283 72 219 160 59 240 222 221 362 1 068 1 230 469 644 407 557 277 67 195 147 59 226 190 215 348 916 1 149 415 638 402 532 6 5 24 13 - 14 32 6 14 152 81 54 6 5 25 1 248 660 521 779 872 1 122 1 467 1 005 1 501 2 793 2 181 830 1 324 1 161 1 107 281 246 328 319 277 619 801 432 456 850 655 172 402 358 264 301 179 95 150 167 126 348 131 228 327 311 169 256 127 241 171 127 63 149 158 125 173 159 216 491 293 173 167 211 195 362 78 7 94 209 143 74 164 275 681 652 146 260 272 181 133 30 28 67 61 109 71 119 326 444 270 170 239 193 226 678 256 239 367 412 438 205 520 903 1 474 1 277 332 796 573 601 164 94 54 176 63 95 6 153 304 705 623 282 263 279 207 18 5 8 - - 8 24 42 37 124 143 94 77 103 82 388 305 220 236 397 581 1 232 290 257 490 138 122 188 206 217 610 468 474 413 672 1 069 1 435 612 519 931 521 259 616 540 519 66 80 17 - 36 40 95 23 - 126 - - 5 4 - 34 64 72 22 179 239 237 58 25 114 - 15 9 9 45 63 79 61 153 310 485 156 75 31 5 10 21 38 15 160 82 50 104 113 244 190 141 164 70 10 46 95 139 79 215 116 168 190 159 189 340 188 206 351 201 89 289 230 220 30 37 88 25 26 27 47 31 34 180 259 62 142 72 113 23 6 - 7 - 14 6 - 10 24 17 10 44 29 50 32 - - - - - - - 11 9 25 5 5 8 5 20 - 4 6 6 35 15 - 5 24 20 17 - 14 25 5100 583 5122 5104 575 576 576 591 599 5117 5157 5127 5127 5114 5122 610 468 474 413 672 1 069 1 435 612 519 931 521 239 616 540 519 325 317 222 198 442 609 987 276 137 433 81 121 193 227 222 20 24 22 5 70 69 120 16 - 15 - - 5 5 5 44 9 17 16 31 69 103 43 21 48 - 6 11 20 9 55 63 27 30 94 109 196 61 14 93 16 10 34 42 32 184 208 141 136 205 331 512 140 96 250 54 93 138 151 160 22 13 15 11 42 31 56 16 6 27 11 12 5 9 16 35.0+ 35.0+ 35.0+ 35.0+ 35.0+ 35.0+ 35.0+ 35.0+ 35.0+ 35.0+ 35.0+ 35.0+ 35.0+ 35.0+ 35.0+ 167 92 138 171 172 362 333 240 207 253 179 70 250 213 137 95 48 49 82 138 311 229 199 143 119 25 28 124 106 79 17 20 35 59 23 30 65 17 40 68 65 27 53 50 43 41 19 44 15 11 16 24 24 14 60 75 5 41 38 10 14 - 10 15 - 5 11 - 5 6 5 5 32 10 5 5 4 - 5 - 9 5 - 9 19.1 18.9 22.9 - 20.3 - 11.9 - 13.4 17.1 15.0 16.8 20.6 24.6 20.8 201 19.7 19.0 82 53 75 23 53 70 87 96 154 171 187 32 105 100 112 9 - - - - - - II - 5 - - 4 - 9 - - - - 5 - 9 11 - - - 4 13.6 10.0- 14.1 12.1 10.0- - 10.0- 11.8 12.3 15.5 16.7 17.3 14.3 12.9 16.4 36 6 39 21 5 28 28 - 21 74 74 36 68 - 48 - - - - - - - - 5 5 - - - 6 - - - - - - - - - 5 10.0- - 12.0 ... ... 10.0- 10.0- - 12.1 12.5 15.6 11.1 - 12.1 t 1 'Excludes one -family homes on 10 acres or more. H-66 MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL, MINN., SMSA A.8-26 CENSUS TRACTS Table H-2. Structural, Equipment, and Financial Characteristics of Housing Units: 1970-Continued Moto based on sample. see text. For minimum base for derived figures (percent. median, etc.) and meaning of symbols, see text] Census Tracts AN pemr-rettmd hetrslm, wits UNITS IN STRUCTURE 1 (includes mobile home, or trade') 2_ 3 and 4 5 to 49 50 or more YEAR STRUCTURE BUILT 1969 to March 1970 1965 to 1968__ 1960 10 1964 _ 1950 to 1959. 1940 to 1949 1939 or earlier HEATING EQUIPMENT Steam or hot water Warm air furnace Built-in electric units Floor. wall, or pipeless furnace Other meons or not heated EASEMENT All units with basement One -family houses with basement SELECTED EQUIPMENT With more than 1 bathroom ___ With public water supply With public sewer _______ _______________ With air conditioning Room unit(s) Central system AN occupied housing omits YEAR MOVED INTO UNIT 1968 to March 1970 1965 to 1967 1960 to 1964 1950 10 1959 1949 or earlier AUTOMOBILES AVAILABLE 3 or more__ _ None___________________________________________ GROSS RENT SpeciM1 renter steepled eehs' __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ Less than $40___________________________________ 640 to $59 $60 to $79____ $80 to $99 $100 to $149____________ ______________ $150 to $199 ______ $200 to $249_________ $250 or more No cash rent _____ Median __ __ __ GROSS RENT AS PERCENTAGE OF INCOME BY INCOME SpdNlel renter accept% ..Its. Less than $5,000____ less than 20 percent 20 to 24 percent 25 to 34 percent _________________ 35 percent or more Not computed Median _ $5.000 to $9,999--------------__________ ---______ less than 20 percent 20 to 24 percent 25 to 34 percent 35 percent or more Not computed Medan $10,000 to $14,999 25 percent or more Not computed ____________ __________ ______---- _ Medan $15,000 or more 25 percent or more Not computed Median St. Paul -Con. Troct Tract Tract Troct Tract Troct Tract Troct Troct Troct Tract Troct Troct Trott Tract 0352 0353 0354 0355 0356 0357 0358 0359 0360 0361 0362 0363 0364 0365 0366 1 621 1 955 1 318 1 881 980 1 116 1 906 777 794 718 2 071 1 253 1 710 1 844 1 682 850 980 425 127 177 610 254 171 233 187 1 371 1 006 1 389 1 316 1 344 204 290 350 129 144 141 131 173 187 142 137 58 106 71 51 56 76 225 248 , 151 98 134 118 109 176 5 19 18 36 43 511 609 318 1 117 508 267 1 376 309 265 75 378 170 197 288 200 - - - 260 - - 11 6 - 138 180 135 44 4 - 24 - - - - - 5 150 33 42 29 - 17 - - 27 11 11 191 15 - - - 31 122 24 53 9 227 16 - 70 59 7 47 176 14 47 40 59 58 140 43 67 27 5 26 33 - 25 369 59 121 197 158 101 94 53 119 56 16 64 31 9 29 353 274 196 302 265 1392 1 639 1189 1 451 881 1 095 1 719 643 767 421 1 158 906 1 346 1 126 1 045 1 267 1 481 1 082 1 598 868 1 052 1 713 377 470 221 1 080 771 1 085 878 612 289 434 195 184 56 59 148 215 146 320 935 463 599 886 994 39 12 9 38 45 - 25 28 6 15 6 - 8 35 34 - 10 13 22 - - 5 25 38 20 34 - 5 19 22 26 18 19 39 11 5 15 132 134 142 16 19 13 28 20 1615 1 927 1 309 1 859 970 1116 1 840 752 750 682 2 051 1 231 1 697 1 785 1 656 850 976 416 127 167 610 254 171 214 156 1 371 994 1 389 1 302 1 334 419 518 259 118 168 466 306 92 91 95 814 464 474 354 683 1 621 1 955 1 318 1 871 969 1 125 1 906 788 783 705 2 070 1 253 1 710 1 846 1 682 1 621 1 955 1 318 1 881 963 1 125 1 906 788 775 712 2 070 1 253 1 710 1 846 1 682 634 801 302 194 240 429 515 202 170 100 1 333 588 980 857 888 604 761 296 194 240 407 476 190 158 93 1 059 511 901 798 749 30 40 6 - - 22 39 12 12 7 274 77 79 59 139 1 603 1 926 1 179 1 426 924 1 106 1 801 760 728 698 2 026 1 241 1 6% 1 797 1 463 466 448 647 723 341 248 840 297 210 249 376 245 408 347 251 288 386 157 404 165 151 345 178 195 158 366 187 282 305 269 251 309 159 199 152 308 235 118 88 111 363 134 197 177 257 288 364 124 152 137 192 200 57 123 90 483 283 349 420 355 310 419 92 148 129 207 181 110 112 90 438 392 460 548 531 807 1 074 474 647 457 497 861 343 322 320 1 060 704 834 1 011 813 359 351 185 81 126 368 272 84 70 60 623 317 537 409 554 87 47 67 25 16 82 39 7 7 10 117 34 71 46 130 350 454 453 873 325 159 629 326 329 308 226 186 254 331 166 688 $61 736 1 476 679 427 1 471 576 474 488 658 260 333 530 350 10 5 9 185 10 5 42 27 41 72 - - - 20 9 60 357 22 20 157 108 58 90 46 6 - 5 80 64 138 331 88 42 218 136 169 82 30 12 19 - 18 5 172 226 257 292 238 58 416 164 59 85 92 89 31 58 27 245 394 194 251 269 182 394 77 103 139 208 94 156 207 120 114 128 70 34 26 59 145 34 27 5 62 39 73 96 31 30 20 - 12 21 30 21 - - - 36 2 34 98 17 5 5 - 21 30 - - 158 - 5 4 123 17 10 5 12 5 10 48 30 17 - 15 26 18 15 49 22' $115 $111 $92 $73 $99 $116 $94 $80 $76 $78 $137 $108 $136 $135 $161 688 $61 73$ 1 476 679 427 1 471 576 474 488 658 260 333 530 350 324 277 364 885 294 139 723 278 251 269 161 99 110 140 83 10 5 15 103 10 - 49 53 14 24 5 - - 9 - 20 18 36 109 22 10 83 20 15 15 6 - - 70 77 81 206 75 49 175 59 46 74 19 20 8 - 9 11 218 158 210 436 167 75 381 126 153 142 126 64 94 98 55 6 19 22 31 20 5 35 20 23 14 5 15 8 24 17 35.0+ 35.0+ 35.0+ 35.0+ 35.0+ 35.0+ 35.0+ 34.5 35.0+ 35.0+ 35.0+ 35.0+ 35.0+ 35.0+ 35.0+ 217 356 249 421 246 151 465 225 138 142 273 119 120 196 79 115 238 160 328 156 77 294 164 99 96 142 66 50 64 38 44 66 59 54 53 47 75 35 22 10 66 37 27 48 13 37 43 25 27 26 16 47 5 10 31 35 13 23 51 17 21 9 - 6 11 6 25 6 - - 20 - 15 21 11 5 6 - 5 24 15 7 5 10 3 5 12 19.4 18.3 17.2 14.2 18.2 19.4 17.8 14.6 15.2 16.0 19.1 19.2 21.4 22.9 20.6 124 161 111 142 107 80 196 69 73 59 79 29 82 131 81 6 - - 4 - - - 15 - 10 10 27 11 6 - - 4 10 11 - 6 9 5 14.2 13.6 13.3 11.1 13.0 11.9 11.4 10.0- 11.8 11.6 14.9 15.7 17.5 16.3 19.0 23 67 14 28 32 57 87 4 12 18 145 13 21 63 107 - - - - - - 15 - - - 5 - - - - 9 - - - 5 - - 9 11.0 ... 10.0- 11.4 10.5 10.0- ... -.. 15.0 ... 10.3 12.9 'Excludes one -family homes on 10 acres or more. CENSUS TRACTS A.8 - 27 MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL, MINN., SMSA H-67 Table H-2. Structural, Equipment, and Financial Characteristics of Housing Units: 1970-Continued (Doto based on sample, see text. For minimum base for derived figures (percent, median, etc.) and meaning of symbols, see text] Census Tracts AN yes -round housing units UNITS IN STRUCTURE 1 (includes mobile home or trailer) 2 3 and 4 Sto49 50 or more YEAR STRUCTURE BUILT 1969 to Morch 1970 1965 to 1968 1960 to 1964 1950 to 1959 1940 to 1949 1939 or earlier HEATING EQUIPMENT Steam or hot water Warm air furnoce __ Built-in electric units Floor, wall, or pipeless furnoce Other means or not heated BASEMENT All units with basement One -family houses with basement SELECTED EQUIPMENT With more than 1 bothroom With public water supply With public sewer ------__-_____-------_' With oir conditioning Room unit(s) _____ Central system AN 6ccepiwd homing units YEAR MOVED INTO UNIT 1968 to March 1970 1965 to 1967 1960 to 1964 1950 to 1959__________________ _ _ 1949 or earlier__ AUTOMOBILES AVAILABLE 1 3 or more_______________-------_-__ None GROSS RENT Specified renter eccepM6 wits, less than $40 340 to $59--------______ ____________ -_____ 380 to $99 $100 to $149 $150to$199 $200 to $249 $250 or more No cosh rent __ _ Median GROSS RENT AS PERCENTAGE OF INCOME BY INCOME Specified renter occwpled woks, Less than $5,000____ less than 20 percent 20 to 24 percent 25 to 34 percent 35 percent or more Not computed _____ Median $5,000 to $9,999 Less than 20 percent 20 to 24 percent 25 to 34 percent __ 35 percent or more Not computed Median $10,000 to $14,999 25 percent or more Not computed Median $15,000 or more __ 25 percent or more Not computed Median St. Poul - Con. Balance of Ramsey County Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract 0367 0368 0369 0370 0371 0372 0374 0375 0376.01 0376.02 Tract Tract Tract Tract 0401 0402 0403.01 0403.02 1 784 1 093 1 053 1 176 1 608 2 067 1 662 2 109 1 U7 1 183 1 186 661 553 778 778 1 136 1 183 1 597 1 114 169 188 305 299 255 .391 510 49 95 48 44 46 62 85 46 161 125 - 5 23 17 198 65 116 97 272 296 164 412 540 944 166 - - 6 - 266 - 162 9 160 - - 7 9 23 401 - 106 - 21 10 - 32 34 177 525 25 46 139 102 43 12 35 119 151 339 167 81 253 300 51 49 32 69 269 192 885 941 489 116 30 16 81 115 158 51 726 366 200 1 085 959 976 989 1 262 1 289 154 306 347 102 702 491 490 594 824 591 400 496 568 655 960 445 351 512 623 1 180 1 170 1 525 1 216 366 47 11 21 4 17 30 57 31 49 134 10 27 35 27 17 45 16 25 34 14 65 119 156 39 127 221 19 32 20 14 1 715 1 064 1 018 1 172 1 538 1 991 1 379 2 023 1 711 1 023 1 164 641 549 778 758 1 119 1 134 1 561 1 037 151 371 277 180 327 344 365 919 1 146 361 75 1 784 1093 1 053 1 176 1 608 2 054 1 422 2 099 1 887 1 183 1 708 1 093 1 053 1 176 1 600 2 054 1 456 2 109 1 887 1 150 632 358 245 308 478 694 952 1 588 1 056 565 563 323 237 308 462 629 631 1 015 852 533 69 35 8 - 16 65 321 573 204 32 1 663 1 06S 1 018 1 1S6 1 S68 2 019 1 594 2 086 1 859 1 159 329 253 227 289 497 517 777 405 582 579 209 162 181 182 222 405 311 353 310 256 267 110 114 209 297 332 272 331 318 204 389 220 202 154 240 361 148 696 581 76 469 320 294 322 312 404 86 301 68 44 868 577 544 652 875 1 169 822 862 891 753 406 239 143 234 259 397 661 873 480 236 93 24 7 48 44 69 92 194 80 296 225 324 222 390 384 19 157 408 170 465 328 413 338 686 758 563 513 821 997 35 5 6 - - - 56 6 43 11 27 17 6 30 - 5 60 4 43 54 99 19 85 66 5 6 16 15 29 90 116 41 234 175 10 26 67 64 215 119 133 153 237 277 84 210 369 551 82 27 16 52 92 188 262 200 212 331 - 5 17 6 9 87 35 21 22 - 33 7 110 15 4 - 18 - 22 11 6 19 13 5 16 16 4 $118 $98 991 $127 $101 $118 9184 $150 $133 5139 463 328 413 338 686 738 563 513 821 997 134 136 174 97 274 253 52 177 411 210 13 - 9 5 - - - - 15 10 9 5 16 5 10 - - 18 31 41 57 18 60 25 - 26 55 11 70 85 82 61 188 198 52 128 291 181 11 5 10 13 21 20 - 23 32 8 35.0+ 35.0+ 35.0 35.0+ 35.0+ 35.0+ 35.0+ 35.0+ 35.0+ 35.0+ 232 149 150 134 268 332 216 156 209 472 141 106 109 77 150 185 35 32 73 180 29 12 28 25 48 87 54 51 85 124 55 13 8 13 59 49 72 49 35 157 7 6 5 13 11 11 50 20 11 11 - 12 - 6 - - 5 4 5 18.5 14.6 16.3 18.7 18.7 18.8 27.3 24.3 21.7 22.3 83 38 89 57 108 150 153 102 123 214 - -4 - - 35 5 - 7 - 5 - 4 - - - 11 - 12.8 11.5 11.1 15.6 11.8 15.7 18.9 18.5 14.9 15.6 16 • 5 - 50 36 23 142 78 78 101 - 5 - _ - - 6 - - - - - 10.3 10.4 ... 13.8 - 10.0- - 11.8 - 12.1 722 742 680 1 767 696 601 608 1 481 22 54 4 5 - 49 4 38 68 - 281 18 11 16 50 44 11 81 389 62 19 107 632 161 65 246 646 110 85 97 34 327 551 133 16 106 208 118 207 481 423 549 1 507 8 15 4 38 55 15 4 15 72 81 5 - 564 677 613 1 598 542 553 589 1 475 236 248 288 732 6 569 610 1 770 6 562 628 1 765 174 219 284 734 155 191 225 620 19 28 59 114 702 724 647 1 763 176 178 174 598 141 115 127 393 129 94 134 441 148 147 155 331 108 190 57 - 317 419 287 784 314 210 319 870 67 35 31 102 4 60 10 7 94 184 74 t98 6 5 - - - 4 5 - 16 40 4 15 70 9 91 19 33 53 164 22 - - 33 5 15 - 10 7 16 8 $157 9118 $169 $168 94 184 74 298 40 70 18 52 6 - 20 21 39 18 - 48 13 5 - 4 35.0+ 35.0+ ... 35.0+ 21 70 14 95 10 27 5 18 - 21 5 18 11 6 4 37 5 - 22 - 11 20.6 .. 28.1 27 39 22 4 18.2 14.2 - .. 99 12 18.4 6 5 20 52 - 8 11.6 t r t t .Excludes one-fomily homes on 10 ocres or more. H-68 MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL, MINN., SMSA A.8 - 28 CENSUS TRACTS APPENDIX 9 AIR QUALITY AND WATER QUALITY DATA 1. MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY A. 9-2 AIR QUALITY STANDARDS 2. SELECTED WATER QUALITY READINGS TAKEN BY THE UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY FROM THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER AT ST. PAUL (STATION 05331000) IN 1972, 1973. A. 9-3 - A. 9-8 A. 9 -1 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Air Quality Standards STATE OF MINNESOTA AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS (July 7, 1969; amended June 3, 1970; amended February 18, 1971; amended April 13, 1972) Pollutant/Air Contaminant Concentration Remarks (1) Hydrogen Sulfide 0.05 ppm by volume (P) (70. 0 micrograms per cubic meter) 0.03 ppm by volume (42.0 micrograms per cubic meter) (2) (3) Photochemical Oxidants (P & S) Carbon Monoxide (P & S) (4) Hydrocarbons (P & S) (5) Sulfur Oxides (P & S) (6) Particulate Matter (P) 0. 07 ppm by volume (130 micrograms per cubic meter) 9 ppm by volume (10 milligrams per cubic meter) 30 ppm by volume (35 milligrams per cubic meter) 0.24 ppm by volume (160 micrograms per cubic meter) 0.02 ppm by volume (60 micrograms per cubic meter) 0.25 ppm by volume (655 micrograms per cubic meter) 75 micrograms per cubic meter 260 micrograms per cubic meter 1/2 hr. average not to be exceeded over 2 times per year 1/2 hr. average not to be exceeded over 2 times in any 5 consecutive days maximum 1 hr. concentra- tion not to be exceeded more than once per year maximum 8 hr. concentra- tion not to be exceeded more than once per year maximum 1 hr. concentra- tion not to be exceeded more than once per year maximum 3 hr. concentra- tion (6 to 9 a. m.) not to be exceeded more than once per year corrected for methane maximum annual arithmetic mean maximum 3 hr. concentra- tion not to be exceeded more than once per year maximum annual geometric mean maximum 24 hr. concentra- tion not to be exceeded more than once per year Pollutant/Air Contaminant Concentration Remarks Particulate Matter (S) (7) Nitrogen Oxides (P & S) P refers to 60 micrograms per cubic meter 150 micrograms per cubic meter maximum annual geometric mean maximum 24 hr. concentra- tion not to be exceeded more than once per year 0. 05 ppm maximum annual arithmetic (100 micrograms mean per cubic meter) Primary Standards and S refers to Secondary Standards. All measurements of ambient air quality are corrected to a reference temperature of 25°C (77°F) and a reference pressure of 760 millimeters (3. 4 in.) of mercury. Notes: The "primary" air quality standards are levels of air pollutants above which, on the basis of present knowledge, health hazards or impairment may be produced. Health hazards include not only production, aggravation or possible production of disease, but also interference with function. Health impairment includes sensory irritation and impairment of well being by such phenomena as odor. The "secondary'' air quality standards are levels which are desirable to protect the public welfare from any known or anticipated adverse effects, such as injury to agricultural crops and live- stock, damage to or deterioration of property, annoyance and nuisance of person, sensory impairment and obstruction, or hazards to air and ground transportation. Water Quality Readings from Mississippi River at St. Paul 1972-1973 STATION NUMBER: PROCESSING DATE: 73/01/31 05331000 - MISSISSIPPI RIVER AT ST. PAUL. MINN. WATER YEAR - 1973 TYPE OF STATION: STREAM LATITUDE -LONGITUDE: 445640 0930520 STATE: 27 COUNTY: DISTRICT: 27 BID- DIS- PER- CHEM- FECAL TOTAL SOLVED ALKA- DIS_ DIS- CENT ICAL COLI- COIL- PHOS- SOLIDS LINITY SOLVED SOLVED SATUR- OXYGEN FORM FORM 015- PHORUS (TONS A5 APMCNIA TYPE TIME OXYGEN ATION DEMAND CHARGE (P) PER CAC03 (NH4) DATE IMG/LI (MG/L1 (MPN1 IMPN) ICES) IMG/L1 DAY1 IMG/LI (MG/L1 00301 00301 00310 31505 31615 00060 00665 70302 00410 71845 OCT. 04... 3 1300 10.4 106 -- 04... 2 1300 -- -- 1.8 17000 2300 13400 0.10 9910 171 0.1 D1S- DIS- NON- SODIUM SOLVED a SOLVED CAR- DIS_ DIS_ AO- ORGANIC D15- DIS- AMMONIA SOLIDS BONATE HARD- SOLVED SOLVED SORP- NITRO- SOLVED SOLVED NITRO - (TONS HARD- NESS NITRATE NITRITE PHENOLS TION PERCENT GEN NITRATE NITRITE GEN QD PER NESS ICA.MG) (N031 IN021 RATIO SODIUM (NI (Ni (N) (N) W DATE AC-FTI (MG/LI (MG/LI IMG/L1 (MG/Ll (UG/L) (MG/LI IMG/L) (MG/L) (MG/LI 70303 00902 00900 71850 71855 32730 00931 00932 00605 00618 00613 00608 OCT. 04... -- -' -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -_ 04... 0.37 30 200 1.1 0.07 22 0.3 8 1.2 0.2 0.021 0.1 TOTAL DIS- DIS- DIS- SPECI- KJEL- SOLVED SOL- DIS- SOLVED COLOR FIG DAHL NITRITE VED- SOLVED MAG- TUR- (PLAT- COND- BICAR- CAR- NITRO- PLUS PHOS- CAL- NE- TEMP- BID- INU'"- UCTANCE PH BONATE BONATE GEN NITRATE PHORUS CIUM SLUM ERATURE ITY COBALT (MICRO- (HCO31 (C031 (NI (NI (P1 (CAI (MG( DATE (DEG CI (JTUI UNITS) MHOS) (UNITS) (MG/LI (MG/L1 IMG/L) IMG/L1 IMG/LI (MG/1.1 IMG/LI 00010 00070 00080 00095 00400 00440 00445 00625 00631 00666 00915 00925 OCT. 04... 04... 15.0 10 50 395 7.9 2C9 0 1.3 0.2 0.080 51 18 DIS- DIS- SOLVED DIS- 015- SOLVED DIS- PO- SOLVED DIS- SOLVED SOLIDS SOLVED TAS- CHLO- SOLVED FLUO- SUS- IRESI- SODIUM SIUM RIDE SULFATE RIDE PENDED DUE AT (NAI (K). (CLI IS041 IFI SOLIDS 180 CI DATE IMG/L1 (MG/LI (MG/LJ IMG/L3 IMG/LI IMG/LI (MG/LI 03930 00935 00940 00945 00950 7029S 70300 A OCT., 04... 04... 8.2 2.3 9.1 28 0.4 19 274 =III NMI IIIIIII MP OM Mill OM INN ill NMI IIIIII E SIMI Ell I STATION NUMBER: TYPE OF STATION: STREAM PROCESSING DATE: 73/01/31 05331000 - MISSISSIPPI PIVER AT ST. PAUL, MINN. WATER YEAR - 1973 LATITUDE -LONGITUDE: 445640 0930520 STATE: 27 CCUATY: DISTRICT: 27 BIO- DIS-- CHEM- FECAL 4LKA- TOTAL SOLVED DIS_ DIS- DIS- ICAL COLT- COLI- LINITY ALUM- ALUM- SOLVED SOLVED SCLV'.) B1CAR- OXYGEN FORM FORM AS INUM INUM AMMCNIA ARSENIC BARIUM BONATE TYPE TIME DEMAND CAC03 (ALI (ALI (NH4) (AS) (BA) (HCO3) DATE (MG/L) (MPN) (MPNI (MG/LI (UG/L1 (UG/LI (MG/L1 lUG/LI (UG/L1 (MG/LI 00310 31505 31615 00410 C1105 01106 71845 01000 01005 00440 NOV. 22... 2 0950 1.5 7900 2300 181 300 50 0.1 2 0 221 22... 3 0950 DIS- DIS- DIS- HEXA- DIS- SPECI- SOLVED DIS- DIS- SOLVED SOLVED VALENT SOLVED DIS- COLOR FIC DIS- SCUDS SOLVED SOLVED CAL- CHLO- CHRO- CHRO- SOLVED (PLAT- COND- SOLVED (REST- SOLIDS BORON CIUM RIDE MIUY MIUM COBALT INUM- UCTANCE COPPER CYANIDE DUE AT (TONS (8) (CAI (CLI -(CR61 (CR) (C01 COBALT (MICRO- (Cu) (CNI 180 CI PER DATE (UG/LI (MG/LI (MG/LI (UG/L) (UG/L) (UG/L) UNITS/ MHOSI (UG/LI (MG/LI (MG/L) AC -FT/ 01020 00915 00940 01032 01030 01035 00080 00095 01040 00720 70300 70303 NOV. 22... 22... 50 64 11 0 0 0 50 490 14 0.00 354 0.48 -- -- -- - 550 DIS- DIS- DIS- NON- SOLVED CIS - SOLVED SOLVED CAR- 015- DIS- DIS- MAG- TOTAL SCLVED CIS - SOLIDS FLUO- BONATE HARD- SOLVED TOTAL SOLVED SOLVED NE- MAN- MAN- SOLVED (TONS RIDE HARD- NESS IRON IRON LEAD LITHIUM SIUM GANESE GANESE NICKEL PER (F) NESS ICA.MGI (FEI (FE) (PBI (LI) (MGI (MN) (mN) (MI DATE DAY► (MG/L1 (MG/LI (MG/L) (UG/LI (UG/L1 (UG/L1 (UG/LI (MG/1) (UG/L) (00/LI (UG/LI 70302 00950 00902 00900 01046 01045 01049 01130 00925 01055 01056 01065 NOV. 22... 18900 0.4 77 260 180 56C 2 20 24 140 70 2 22... L- -- -- -- -- 0)5- SOLVED SODILM DIS- DIS_ DIS_ P0- AD- DIS- SOLVED DIS- SOLVED SOLVED TAS- SORP- SOLVED STRON- SOLVED NITRATE NITRITE PH PHENOLS SIUM T1CN SODIUM PERCENT DIS- TIUM SULFATE TEMP- (N031 IN021 (K) RATIC (NA) SODIUM CHARGE ISRI (504) ERATU<E DATE IMG/LI (MG/LI (UNITS) (UG/L) (MG/LI (MG/L) (CFSI (UG/LI (MG/LI (EEG CI 71850 71855 00400 32730 00935 00931 00930 00932 00060 01080 00945 00010 NOV. 22... 22... 49 0.03 7.7 3 3.0 C.3 10 -- -- 8.2 -- -- 8 198C0 220 61 1.0 -- -- 1.0 STATION NUMBER: PROCESSING DATE: 73/01/31 05331000 - MISSISSIPPI RIVER AT ST. PAUL, MINN. WATER YEAR - 1973 TYPE OF STATION: STREAM LATITUDE -LONGITUDE: 445640 0930520 STATE: 27 COUNTY: DISTRICT: 27 TOTAL DIS- DIS- DIS- KJEL- DIS- DIS- DIS- SOLVED SOL- DIS- ORGANIC SOLVED DAHL SOLVED SOLVED SOLVED AMMONIA VED- DIS- TUR- SOLVED NITRO- CAD- NITRO- SELE- POLY- VANA- NITRO- OIL PHCS- SCLVEO BID- ZINC GEN MIUM GEN NIUP BOENUM DIUM GEN AND PHORUS NITRITE ITY (ZNI (NI (CD) (NI (SEI (M01 (VI (NI GREASE (P) (NI DATE 1JTU1 IUG/ll (MG/L1 IUG/LI (MG/L1 IUG/LI IUG/LI (UG/L1 (MG/LI IMG/LI (MG/L1 (MG/LI 00070 01090 00605 01025 00625 01145 01060 01085 00608 00550 00666 00613 NOV. 22... 22... 20 20 0.9 0 1.0 4 2 1.1 0.09 4.0 0.070 C.010 DIS- DIS- SOLVED SOLVED SILVER NITRATE (AG) INI DATE IUG/LI (MG/L1 01075 00618 NOV. 22... 22... SUS- PEr0EO SOLIDS (MG/(.1 70799 DIS- DIS- SOLVED SOLVED DIS- NITRITE TOTAL TOTAL BERYL- SOLVED TOTAL PLUS BERYL- CAD- LIUM MERCURY MERCURY NITRATE LIUM MIUM. (PEI (HGI (HG1 (NI (BEI (CD) (UG/LI ((1G/L1 IUG/LI (MG/L1 IUG/lI IUG/LI 01010 71890 7190C 00631 01012 01027 TOTAL COBALT (COI IUG/L1 01037 TOTAL COPPER ICU1 ( 11G/LI 01042 TOTAL LEAD (PBI (UG/LI 01051 2 11 19 0 0.2 10 11 0 1 0 40 4 TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL CARBON DIS- NICKEL SILVER ZINC DIOXIDE SOLVED INI) (AGI IZNI (CO21 OXYGEN DATE IUG/L1 IUG/LI IUG/L1 IMG/LI (MG/LI 01067 01077 01092 00405 00300 NOV. 22... 61 8 60 7.1 22... -- -- -- 10.7 - - - - - - - - - - - ST4TIJ44 NU^(BE;: TYPE' JF 5TAT10'J: STR(AM PROCESSING DATE: 71/12// 05331000 - MISSISSIPPI RIVER AT ST. PAUL, MINN. WATER YEAR - 1573 LATITULI-LC'JGITUDE: 445640 0910520 STATL: 27 COUNTY: UISTRIC1: 27 810- DIS- SPECI- CHFK- FECAL SOLVED COLD? F1C ICUL Colt- COL!- SOLIDS TU3- (PLAT- CCND- nlS- JXYGEI: FC3'a• .ORN (TCNS TEMP- BID- IM'UM- UCTANCE PH TYPE TIFF CNA1GE UEKANC PER ERATURC ITY COBALT ('<IC40- . DATE (C.FS! ('G/1) ("PN) (MPAI DAY)(DEG CI (JTU) UNITS) MHOS) (UNITS) 00060 00310 31505 31615 70302 00010 00070 00390 00095 00400 JAN, 01... 2 1300 55002.5 13000 4900 7760 0.0 4 30 520 7.7 03... 3 1300 -- -- -- -- -- 0.0 O1S- TOTAL DIS- DIS— SOLVED KJEL— SOLVED SCL— ALK4- ORGeNIC AMMONIA AMMONIA DIS- DIS- OAHL NITRITE VED- Ca?1JV LINITY BICA3- CAR- NITRO- NITRC- NITRO- SOLVED SOLVED NITRO- PLUS PFOS- DIOX109 AS BCNATE 90NATE GEN GEN GEN NITRITE NITRATE GEN NITRATE PHCRUS (C')21 CACn3 (HCO3) (C031 (NI (N) (NI (N) (N) . (N) (NI IP) DATE ("G/LI (M;;/L) ('"G/Li (MG/L1 (MG/L) (MG/LI (MG/L) (MG/L) (MG/L) (MG/LI (PG/L) (MG/L) a 00405 00.10 00440 00445 00605 00609 00610 00613 00618 00625 00531 00666 CID 02.., 9.1 733 294 0 0.94 0.26 .0.26 0.023 0.86 1.2 0.83 0.16 03... -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- CIS DIS- DTS- .'.3\- DIS- SCLVE3 SODIUM SOLVED DIS- DIS- CAR- SOLVE NAG- 015- A0- P0- SOLVED DIS- SCLVED H+=O- 3:):ATE CAL- NF- SOLVED SORP- TAS- CHLO- SOLVED FLUID- NESS HOC- CIU'4 SIUM SODIUM TION PERCENT SIUM RICE SULFATE RIDE PHENOLS (Ca,4G1 MESS (CAI (PGI (NA) RATIO SODIUM (K) (CLI (5041 (F) D_"TE (MG/LI ('"G/LI (PG/LI (MG/LI (MG/LI (MG/LI (PG/Ll (RG/LI (Mi/L) (UC/L1 0J?30 03502 00915 00925 00530 00921 00932 00935 00940 00945 00950 32730 03.,. 270 34 64 25 11 C.3 8 3.9 14 38 0.2 4 0?.., -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- DIS- SOLV°D DIS- SOLIDS SOLVED DIS_ DIS_ OTS_ SUS- (SES1- S01.1;)S SOLVED SOLV(D SOLVED ()ENDED CUE AT •(TONS AMMONIA NITRATE NITRITE SOLIDS 180 CI PER (NH4) INC.3) (N021 - DATE (1G/LI ("G/LI AC -FT) (MG/L) (MG/LI (PG/Li 70299 70100 70303 71(145 71950 71955 JAN. 03..4. T 338 0.46 0.33 3.9 C.10 STATION NUMBER: 05131000 - MISSISSIPPI RIVER AT ST. PAUL, MINN. TYPE OF STATION: STREAM LATITUDE-LDNGITUPE: 445640 0930520 PPCCESSING DATE: 73/h3/30 MATER YEAR - 1573 STATE: 27 COUNTY: DISTRICT: 27 SPEC I- RIO- DI5- FIC CHEM- FECAL SOLVED COLCP COND- (CAL COLI- COLT- SOLIDS TUP.- (PLAT- TEMP- IICTANCE DIS- OXYGEN FORM FORM (TONS BID- INU!'- TYPE TIME ERATURF (MICPC- CHARGE DEMAND PER DEPTH ITY CCBALT DATE (DEG C1 MUDS) ICES) (MG/Ll IMPNI IMPNI DAY( (FTI (JTUI UNITS) 00310 00095 00060 00310 31505 31615 70302 00003 00070 00090 FFR. 07... 3 1215 0.0 460 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 07... 2 1215 0.0 492 8900 1.7 22000 790 7750 0.0 4 20 DIS- TOTAL D15- SOLVED KJEL- SOLVED ALKA- ORGANIC AMMONIA AMMONIA 015- DIS- DAHL NITRITE CARRON LINITY BICAR- CAR- NITRC- NITRO- NITRO- SOLVED SOLVED NITRO- PLUS PH DIOXIDE AS BONATE BONATE GEN GEN GEN NITRITE NITRATE GEN NITRATE a - (CD?1 CACD3 (HC031 (C031 INI (NI (NI (NI (N► (NI (NI • DATE (UNITS) IMG/L1 (mG/L1 (MG/LI (MG/LI (NG/L1 (MG/LI (MG/LI (MG/1) (MG/LI (MG/L1 IMG/LI 00400 00405 00410 00440 00445 00605 00608 00610 00613 00618 00625 00631 QD V FEB. 07,,. -- __ __ -- -- 07... 7.7 P.0 204 249 0 0.79 0.31 0.31 0.010 1.3 1.1 1.3 DIS- DIS- DIS- SOL- NON- 015- SOLVED SODIUM SOLVED DIS- DIS- SOLVEDVED- CAP- SOLVED MAG- 015- AO- PC,- DIS- SOLVED PHDS- HARP- BONATE CAL- NE- SOLVED SORP- TAS- CHLO- SOLVED FLUC- PHORUS ' NFSS HARD- CiUM SLUM SODIUM TICN PERCENT SIUM RIOT SULFATE RIDE I91 (CA,"G) NFSS (CAI (MGI (NAI RATIO SODIUM IKI ICI( ISO41 (F) DATE lM,/ll {MG/LI IMi/LI IMC,/LI IMG/LI IMG/LI IMG/L1 IMG/LI IMG/LI IMG/LI 00665 0090) 0090? 00415 00925 00930 00931 00932 00935 00°40 00945 00950 FEB. 07... 07... DATE FES. 07... 07... 0,13 250 44 63 22 11 0.3 9 3.5 13 37 0.4 OI S- SOLVFO DIS- SOLIDS SOLVED UIS_ DIS_ DIS_ SUS- IRESI- SOLIDS SOLVED SOLVED SOLVED PHENOLS PEIIDF.D CUF AT (TONS AMMONIA NITRATE. NITRITE SOLIDS 1R0 CI PER (NH4, (NG31 (N021 IL.G/l l 1mG/L 1 (M:/L) AC-FTI IMG/L1 (MG/LI (MG/LI 32710 70291 70300 70303 71945 71850 71955 0 10 326 0.44 0.40 5.7 0.03 OM STATION 4Ua'1E(: TYPE OF STATION: STr.c4:4 0311000 - MISSISSIPPI klVtH Al ST. P4UL. M1N4. LATITUDE-LON,ITUOt: 445640 0930520 STATE: 27 P.<UCESSIH(, DAIt: t3/03/23 JA(Ek YEAR - 19i3 Cuu:TY: U1SlaIC1: 2I DIS- UIS- DIS- SPECI- SOLVED 01S- Ul - 4LK:.- SULVLO SULVEU CULU. F1C 50L1US SOLVED SULVEU LINITY 8ICAR- CAL- CAR- CHLO- (PLAT- CONO- IRES1- 50LI05 SULI05 As c1JNAIE CLUM LIUNAIE RIDE INUl- UCTANCE DUE AT (TONS 11u.6 TYPE TINE CACU3 (HCO3) (CA) (CU3) (CL) C0414LT (MICRO- 160 CI PER PLR DATE (MG/L) (MG/L) (Mu/L) (MG/L) (M(,/L1 UNIIS) MNUS1 (4G/L) AC -FT) UAY1 00410 00440 0091, 00445 00940 00080 00095 70300 70303 70302 PAR. 07... ? 1230 Ins 226 54 0 13 40 474 298 0.41 12900 U1S- DIS- DIS- NUN- SOLVEU SOLVEDS001U:•l SULVEU CAR- MAu- UIS_ U15_ P0- 40- D15- FLUO- (.)NAIE IAPU- NE- SULVEU SOLVED 145- SORP- SOLVED RIDE HaRu- NESS SIUM NITRATE NITRITE PH PHENOLS SIUM TION SODIUM PERCENT (F) NESS ICA.MG► (MG) (N031 (NO2)- (K) RATIO (NA) SOUIUM DATE (MG/LI (lG/L1 (MG/L1 (MG/L► (Mr,/L1 (MG/L) (UNITS) (UG/L) (MG/L) (MG/L) 00950 9090? 00900 00925 71650 71855 00400 32730 00935 00931 00930 00932 C0 1 TOTAL 0I5- D1S- (o KJLL- • SOL- SOLVED DIS- ORGANIC DAt.L AMMONIA VEO- U15- D15- NITRITE SOLVE') TUR- NITRO- N1TRU- NITRO- PROS- SOLVED SOLVED SUS- PLUS DIS- SULFATE TEMP- 610- GEN GEN GEN PHORUS NITRITE NITRITE PENGEU NITRATE CHARGE (SO4) ERATLRE ITY (N) (N1 (N1 CPI (NI (NI SOLIDS (N) DATE (CF6) (MG/L) .(OLG C) (JTU) THG/L) (MG/L) (MG/L) (MG/L) (MG/L) (MG/L1 (Mu/L) (MG/L1 00t60 00945 00010 00070 0060S 00625 00610 u0666 00613 00b16 70299 00631 MAR. • 07... 0.3 2i 210 )9 6.9 0.13 7.6 2 4.6 0.3 11 10 M6R. 07... 16000 44 3.0 -10 1.4 1.9 0.55 0.21 0.040 1.6 30 1.6 C4RH04 0(0X10E (CO?) 047E OWL) 00405 MAk. 07.... 9.1 CITY OF EAGAN RESOLUTION REGARDING ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DENYING DOT PERrMIT FOR A-1 CROSSING OF BLACi(IIAWK LAKE CITY OF EAGAN, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION REGARDING ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DENYING DOT PERMIT FOR A-1 CROSSING OF BLACKHAWK LAKE WHEREAS, The Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources of the State of Minnesota by Order dated December 15 and served December 19, 1978 found and ordered in pertinent part as follows: "The application of the Minnesota Department of Transportation for permission to route Interstate 35-E across Blackhawk Lake in the City of Eagan is denied. A permit will be granted for the freeway route which passes around the east end of the lake as more precisely described in the hearing record where it is identified as the A-2 route. It is a condition of any such permit that MnDOT must obtain approval from DNR of the final plans and specifications, which shall show that reason- able effort has been made to minimize its impact on the lake and the park." and WHEREAS, The City of Eagan, Minnesota is a party to the proceed- ings before the Department of Natural Resources regarding the DOT application for a permit to bridge Blackhawk Lake in the City of Eagan; and WHEREAS, The continuance through filing of an appeal of the proceedings regarding the routing of I-35-E is a matter of great public concern to the citizens of Eagan and has been the subject of intense public consideration from the time of the first location public hearings in August of 1959 through the latest public hearing held on Tuesday, December 19, 1978; and WHEREAS, The Order of the Commissioner is based upon extensive public hearings which commenced on June 22, 1978 and ran continuously until July 14, 1978, including an evening session preceded by public notice with comments from various members of the public concerned with the project; and WHEREAS, The hearing proceedings included extensive briefing of the issues of fact and law and resulted in a 33-page report and recommendation of a state -appointed Hearing Examiner dated November 9, 1978, which found as follows: and "That the permit application of the Department of Transportation be denied; and (2) that ad- ditional study be undertaken to minimize drainage to the Blackhawk Lake area during construction and after completion of the highway so as to maximize enjoyment of the area on both sides of the highway by design and implementation of natural sound and sight buffer or barriers." WHEREAS, The said recommendation and findings were essentially adopted by the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources with the exception that the Commissioner specifically found: "Contrary to the Hearing Examiner's finding in Paragraph 91 that the environmental effects which would be caused by construction of the freeway along Route A-2 are not 'material' I specifically find such effects to be material as the effects always will be when associated with a project of such scope. However, said effects as a whole will be significantly reduced by con- struction along Route A-2 than along Route A-1 and no other more feasible and prudent route has been shown to exist." and WHEREAS, The City Council of the City of Eagan has expressed a serious concern that the findings and recommendations of the Hearing Examiner and Order of the Commissioner failed to properly take into account or answer the following concerns: 1. In the event of selection of the A-2 route, what provision would be made for the reimbursement of the City of Eagan's costs in relocating and revising public utilities within the right-of-way of the A-2 alignment. 2. In the event of selection of the A-2 alignment, what environmental review would be necessitated by the Federal Highway Administration causing possible delay of the highway design and construction. 3. What steps would be taken by the Minnesota Department of Transportation in the event of the selection of the A-2 route to immediately begin the design and implementation of an A-2 alignment. 4. In the event of the selection of A-2, what would be the Department of Transportation's best estimate as the time needed to design and implement I-35-E. 5. In the event of the selection of the A-2 alignment, what further proceedings would be necessitated by the Department of Natural Resources, if any. 6. In the event of the selection of A-2, what further environmental or other challenges would parties to the proceeding initiate; and WHEREAS, The City Council has requested further information, assurances and representations in response to these serious concerns which has resulted in obtaining the following information, responses and commitments: 1. The Minnesota Department of Transportation has, by letter dated December 29, 1978 indicated that the cost to be in- curred by the City of Eagan in relocating municipal utilities located within the right-of-way of I-35-E along the so-called A-2 alignment will be expenses 100% reimbursable from federal and state highway funds resulting in no further cost to the City of Eagan for the extensive relocation of utilities which the A-2 route will necessitate. 2. Federal Highway Administration has represented to the City of Eagan that further environmental review of the A-2 alignment will be limited to formal notice of the selection of A-2 as the preferred alignment, said notice to be furnished to all persons receiving the initial Environmental Impact Statement for the bridge permit. Should any further environmental review be necessitated, in the judgment of the FHA, it would be limited to an an3endment of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for Inter- state 35-E in Dakota County, Minnesota from South Jct. I-35 to Jct. T.H. 110 dated August 11, 1977. 3. The Minnesota Department of Transportation has assured the City of Eagan that it will immediately proceed with the design and implementation of I-35-E along the A-2 alignment so as to achieve the estimated contract letting and completion date in- dicated below. 4. The Minnesota Department of Transportation has in- dicated that its best estimate is that design and implementation will result in reaching the contract -letting by March, 1982 and completion of the highway construction by late 1984. 5. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, by letter of December 26, 1978, from Donald A. Kaunas, Special Assistant Attorney General, has responded to the City's concern regarding delays due to further permit or environmental review proceedings by saying that a permit for work in public waters under the statutory jurisdiction of the Department is being initiated for the A-2 route and that "no further applications or review [are] required prior to such issuance." 6. The Associated Families, a party to the administra- tive proceedings before the Department of Natural Resources, and a principal objector to the A-1 route, submitted to the City during the council's meeting of Tuesday, January 2, 1979 a written statement authorized and signed by Associated Families endorsing the A-2 alignment and supporting the Eagan Storm Sewer Plan; and WHEREAS, Associated Families has during the said council meet- ing committed through authorized representatives to unqualifiedly accept the design, construction and implementation of the A-2 alternative as authorized under the DNR Commissioner's Order of December 15, 1978 and subsequent DNR Orders; and WHEREAS, Associated Families through authorized representatives committed at the said council meeting to accept the City of Eagan Storm Sewer Plan and system as described in the Report on Review of Storm Drainage Facilities for Eagan, Minnesota, 1972, as approved and permitted by the DNR Commissioner pursuant to Chapter 105; and WHEREAS, the Minnesota DNR has indicated by letter dated December 28, 1978: "[T]hat the Department of Natural Resources at this time has no problems with the overall concept of the Eagan [storm sewer] plan as presented." WHEREAS, The foregoing assurances, commitments and representa- tions are critical and essential factors in resolving the major concerns not adequately addressed in the report of Hearing Examiner and Order of Commissioner of Department of Natural Resources; and WHEREAS, for reference and background information the follow- ing documents are attached to the resolution and incorporated herein: Attachment 1. Findings of Fact and Order of Commissioner dated December 15 and served December 19, 1978. 2. Report of Hearing Examiner dated November 9, 1978. 3. Letter of December 26, 1978 re further DNR proceedings. 4. Letter of December 28, 1978 re Eagan Storm Sewer Plan. 5. Letter of December 29, 1978 re relocation expenses of City utilities. 6. Statement of Associated Families dated January 2, 1979. 7. Report on Review of Storm Drainage Facilities for Eagan, Minnesota, 1978, and WHEREAS, the counsel has provided for the recording of the open council meeting proceedings of January 2. 1979 and does direct that a transcript be prepared thereof to be filed with the City Clerk as reference and background to the Resolution. NOW THEREFORE, Be it: RESOLVED, That the City Council of the City Eagan in consideration of and in reliance upon the representations and commitments referenced in this resolution does decline to continue further contested case proceedings through the filing of an appeal of the Commissioner's Order of December 15, 1978. of n STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES In the Matter of the Proposed I-35-E Crossing Over Blackhawk Lake, in the City of Eagan, Dakota County. FINDINGS OF FACT AND ORDER OF THE CO1'IISSIOt'ER The Report of the Hearing Examiner was received by this office November 13, 1978. I have accepted exceptions re- ceived through November 28, 1978. I have reviewed the nearing examiner's report, the hearing record and the exceptions. The examiner's conclusion is the outcome of an obviously careful review of the facts and application of the statutes and case law to the facts. I agree with his recommendation and there- fore accept it. In addition, I adopt as my own the findings of fact and conclusions contained in the examiner's report with the following exception: Contrary to the hearing examiner's finding in paragraph 91 that the environmental effects which would be caused by construction of the freeway along route A-2'are not "material," I specifically find such effects to be material as the effects always will be when associated with a project of such scope. However, said effects as a whole, will be significantly reduced by construction along route A-2 than along route A-1, and no other more feasible and prudent route has been shown to exist. ORDER The application of the Minnesota Department of Transportation for permission to route Interstate 35-E across Blackhawk Lake in the City of Eagan, is denied. aA permit will be granted for the 'f rceway route which passes around the east end of the lake as more precisely described in the hearing record where it is identified as the A-2 route. It is a condition of any such permit that MnDOT must obtain approval from Drm of the final plans and specifications, which shall show that reasonable effort has been made to minimize its impact on the lake and the park. Dated this / 6" day of December, 1978. /'_v . ALE) DE R Acting Commissioner Department of Natural Resources LNR- / J-u22-mG STATE OF t•IINNESOTA OFFICE OF HEARING EXAMINERS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES In the Matter of the Proposed I-35-E Crossing over Blackhawk Lake, ir. the City of Eagan, Dakota County. REPORT OF HEARING EXAMINER The above -entitled matter came on for hearing before Hearing Examiner Myron S. Greenberg of the Minnesota Office of Hearing Examiners on June 22, 1978, at the Lost Spur Country Club, 2750 Sibley Memorial Highway, Eagan, Minnesota (in Dakota County). This matter concerns a determination of whether the Minnesota Depart- ment of Natural Resources ("DNR") should grant an application of the Minne- sota Department of Transportation ("DOT", "MDOT" or "Mn/DOT") to build a bridge across Blackhawk Lake in Eagan, Minnesota. Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to Minn. Stat. % 15.0421 (1976), the final decision of the Department of Natural Resources shall not be made until this Report has been made available to the parties to the pro- ceeding for at least ten days, and an opportunity has been afforded to each party adversely affected to file exceptions and present argument to the De- partment. Exceptions to this Report, if any, shall be filed with the Com- missioner of Natural Resources, Third Floor, Centennial Office Building, St. Paul, Minnesota - 55155. Based upon the proceedings herein, the Examiner makes the following: History of the Project 1. Interstate 35 runs from Laredo, Texas to Duluth, Minnesota. In the City of Burnsville, south of the Twin Cities, the freeway divides. I-35-W goes through Minneapolis, I-35-E through St. Paul. The two routes rejoin north of the cities near Forest Lake. From the southern Iowa border north, everything is built and open ex- cept a stretch of five miles of I-35-E in St. Paul from West Seventh Street to the central business district, and the southern -most 13 miles of I-35-E, from its southern terminus in Burnsville to state trunk Highway 110 in Men- dota Heights. (The short piece between Highway 110 north across the Missis- sippi River into St. Paul to West 7th Street is complete.) (MOOT Ex. 1, P. 5) It is the 13-mile segment from Burnsville through the City of Eagan to Highway 110 in Mendota Heights that includes the crossing of Blackhawk Lake. 2. The first location public' hearing regarding this highway was held on august 24, 1959 and dealt with three general location alternatives for the highway. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) approved a location for 35-E on January 29, 1960, and a detailed geometric design was approved by the FHWA on September 14, 1960 (T-42) . 3. On April 8, 1970, a public design hearing covering the portion of 35-E from Burnsville to 4/10ths of a mile south of Lone Oak Road (including the Blackhawk Lake area) was held at Metcalf Junior High School in Burns- ville, Minnesota. (T-44, MDCT Ex. 1, p.20) 4. A design public hearing (an FH',v:\ requirement established in 1969) was held in 1970 on the remaining portion. - the southern terminus to Lone Oak Road (T. 43). MnDot asked For and got trom SHWA all approvals for the part from I-35 to Cedar Avenue in August, 1971. Shortly thereafter, right- of-way acquisition began for that part. Approval for the remaining part - Cedar Avenue to Lone Oak Road, which includes Blackhawk Lake - was then re- quested. Instead of approving, the FHWA responded by recommending that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) be done on the entire 13-mile segment because construction had not begun on any of it. 5. MnDOT began work on the EIS in September, 1973 (MDOT Ex. 1, p. 22). The draft was completed in June, 1976. The public hearing on it re- quired by the rules of the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) was held July 22, 1976. The final EIS came out on May 13, 1977. (A.F. Ex. 7; T. 48) In May, 1978, Mn_XYT applied to DNR for a permit to cross Blackhawk Lake. (DNR Ex. 1.) 6. Following the final EIS approval, applications were made to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) for an indirect source permit regarding air quality. This permit was granted. (MDOT Ex. 16; T. 49-50) 7. As part of the continuing contact between MDOT and local cities and agencies, the City of Eagan gave approval of preliminary plans for the construction of 35-E through the city on November 15, 1977. As part of this approval, the Eagan City Council approved the freeway segment desig- nated Alternative A-1. (T. 50) 8. On May 25, 1978, by letter received from the United States Corps of Engineers, the Corps stated that the construction of a highway bridge across Blackhawk Lake did not require a site -specific permit but would be covered under an existing nationwide permit as specified by Corps of Engin- eers regulations. MDOT Exhibit 17 contains the Corps of Engineers author- ization given pursuant to 33 C.F.R. 323.4-3(a)(2). Procedural History 9. Subsequent to approval of the EIS and Mn,/EDT's selection of the A-1 route which includes a bridge crossing Blackhawk Lake, MnDot applied to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) for the permit neces- sary under Minn. Stat. 5 105.42. The Order for Hearing and Notice of Hear- ing in this case was signed by William B. Nye, Commissioner of the DNR, on June 5, 1978. On June 8th and 15th, 1978, the Order and Notice were_pub- lished in the Dakota County Tribune in order to satisfy the provisions of Minn. Stat. § 105.44. General news articles about the hearings also ap- peared in local papers before and during the hearing. 10. The Order for. and Notice of Hearing conforms to the rules of the Office of Hearing Examiners. It was mailed on June 7, 15 days before the hearing. The normal notice requirement is 30 days, but at the prehearing conference, objection to the shorter notice was waived, all parties desir- ing to proceed promptly. 11. A prehearing conference was held .in this matter pursuant to Minn. Rule HE 213 before the Hearing Examiner on June 16, 1978. At the prehear- ing conference, Petitions to Intervene were submitted by the City of Eagan, the City of Burnsville, the Urban Council on Mobility (UCM), the Dakota County Development Association (DCDA), the Minnesota Pollution Control Agen- cy (PCA) and the Associated Families (AF). At the prehearing conference, the Petitions of the City of Eagan, the PCA and Associated Families were granted. The remainder of the Petitions to Intervene were taken under ad- visement at that time. As a result of the prehearing conference, the par- ties agreed to expedite discovery by informal cooperative arrangements among counsel for parties to the hearing. An on -site inspection of the pro- perty which would be the subject of the hearing was agreed upon as were ar- rangements for the submission of proposed witness and proposed exhibit lists. lists The on -site inspection of the Blackhawk Lake area and surrounding en- vironment occurred on June 23, 1978. At that time, the Hearing Examiner personally viewed the Blackhawk Lake area, including the proposed align- ments for Alternative A-1 and Alternative A-2 for the proposed construction of Interstate Highway 35-E. The hearing in this matter commenced on June 22, 1978 and continued un- til July 14, 1978. On June 22, 1978, during an evening session, comments were received from those members of the public wishing to make statements concerning the matters involved in the hearing. After the hearing, briefs, proposed findings and reply briefs were sub- mitted to the Hearing Examiner by counsel, the last of which was received on September 11, 1978, at which time the record closed. Parties 12. Applicant. The Applicant is the Minnesota Department of Transpor- tation which has had the principal responsibility together with the Federal Highway Department for the design, environmental consideration and imple- mentation of I-35-E. DOT was represented by Eric B. Schultz, Deputy Attor- ney General, and William A. Caldwell, Special Assistant Attorney General. 13. Proponents. The proponents of the A-1 alignment who have sought and received permission to intervene are: the City of Eagan, represented by Paul H. Hauge, of Hauge & Hoey, Eagan City Attorney, and Maclay R. Hyde, Lindouist & Vennu;m, Special Counsel for Eagan; the City of Burnsville, rep- resented by Vance B. Grannis and Vance B. Grannis, Jr., of Grannis & Gran- nis; the Urban Council on Mobility and the Dakota County Development Asso- ciation, represented by Luther M. Stalland and Mark Wilson. 14. Opponents. Associated Families intervened under the Minnesota Environmental Rights Act (Minn. Stat. Ch. 116B) alleging the proposed pro- ject would cause pollution, impairment or destruction of natural resources. This partnership of seven families owns approximately 80 acres of land on the north side of the lake. Four of the members have built and are occupy- ing lake_shore homes. There are six other lakeshore lots, and the partner- ship has also platted a subdivision of 15 lots on the "north forty" acres of the pr ooer ty (T. 2331-36) . Associated Families was represented by Charles K. Dayton, of Dayton, Herman & Graham. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency intervened to oppose the pro- posed lake crossing, alleging adverse environmental effects on quietude, water Quality, and the integrity o[ the lake as a water resource of the state. The PCA was represented by William Donahue, Spacial Assistant Attorney General. Other representatives of the Minnesota Attorney Gener- al's office also occasionally represented the PCA. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources also appeared in opposi- tion to the A-1 alternative. The DNR was represented by A. William Clapp, III, Special Assistant Attorney General. The DNR's participation in this hearing - a matter in which the DNR Commissioner will make the ultimate de- cision was for the purpose of presenting the Agency Staff position through testimony. The Examiner understands that "counsel representing the Agency at the hearing is not the sane as counsel to the decision -makers at the Agency involved in the decision on the issuance of J permit here under consideration." (T. 23-24) The Problem. 15. The EIS discusses four options for the 13-mile segment of I-35-E between I-35 and T.H. 110. One is to build it as proposed. The second is not to build it. The third is to build it as proposed except to route the freeway around the east end of Blackhawk Lake rather than across it. The fourth is to locate the freeway on T.H. 13. The latter alternative is re- jected by the EIS because, as a freeway, it could not fulfill its present important function of providing local street, commercial and residential accesses (MDOT Ex. 1, p. 8) . The no -build alternative is rejected in the EIS with little discussion, probably because the freeway is such an integ- ral part of the Metropolitan Council's planned urbanization of northern Dakota County (Id. pp. 6-12). None of the parties at the hearing gave any support to either T.H. 13 or no -build as viable alternatives to the pro- posed crossing of Blackhawk Lake. The entire hearing was devoted to the relative merits of routing the freeway across the lake or around the lake. The northern and southern termini of the two alternates are approximately three miles apart. The other ten miles of the freeway segment analyzed by the EIS are therefore outside the scope of this hearing. 16. Blackhawk Lake is 35 to 40 acres in size at its Natural Ordinary Highway Water Level (NOHW[) of 792.3 feet above sea level. That contour demarcates the dividing line between aquatic and terrestrial vegetation on the shores or: the lake (T. 2247-49). The normal water level, which is dif- ferent from the ordinary high water level, is 790.3 feet (T. 463, 2247). At that elevation, the lake is 33.95 acres (Eagan Ex. 5, p. E-2). (MnDOT claims the lake covers 30.2 acres at 790.3 feet. (T. 498.) The lake is alp+:o .imate1 3750' long, and narrow along an east -west axis. (The Hear- ing Examiner determined the length by measuring it on MnEGT Ex. 23, using the 792' contour as the lake edge.) The east one-half is 200 feet wide• and two feet deep. The west half is 500 feet wide and six to eight feet deep. W.ni)D E.. 1, p. 38) Its watershed is 296 acres. 17. Eecause the lake is shallow and freezes fish cannot maintain themselves in it. When last (T. 464) over in the winter, game checked in 1961 by the DNR, it contained bullheads which are particularly resistant to the effects of wintertime oxygen depletion. As a Type IV or V-A wetland, it is a mar- ginal fish lake. (MDOT Ex. 1, p. 38; T. 391). An aeration system, if in- stalled, would make it a viable fishery, and DNR would like to see the lake so managed because it is not a particularly Good waterfowl lake and there is a need for fisheries in the metropolitan area. The greater depths made possible by the Eagan storm water plan will also aid the lake as a fishery. (T. 356-58, 372, 374, 387, 392, 981-82, 2253-54; MDGT Ex. 1, p. 33a) In Burnsville, Apple Valley, Eagan and Mendota Heights, there are now four fish lakes (N_EOI Ex. 1, p. 48) . 18. Blackhawk Lake is an integral part of Eagan's storm water manage- ment plan. Eagan's topography is that of a terminal moraine, also described as knob and kettle (T. 305-07, 464, 992). The City will discharge storm water into many of the ponds in the kettles. Ponds will be interconnected by pipes. One such system of interconnections will outlet into Blackhawk Lake, increasing its watershed from 300 acres to about 6,000 acres. (Eagan Ex. 5, p. C-2) It has been calculated that with that watershed, a 100-year storm would raise the water level in Blackhawk Lake six feet. Eagan plans to install a pump to maintain the level at 790.3 feet and to keep it from exceeding the high water level of 796 feet. (T. 1451, 2252, 2297; Eagan Ex 5) 19. The shores of the lake support rich and varied vegetation. (T. 979, 982-84) It is not, however, a particularly good waterfowl lake. (T. 2214) Ducks use it during migration, but not for breeding because the vege- tation is not the right type and the lake lacks loafing areas. (T. 1648, 2230) Otherwise, the basin is moderate to fair wildlife habitat as wetlands go (T. 1648-49, 2225), supporting a mix of songbirds, raptors, shorebirds, small mammals and deer. (T. 278-79, 2888-89, 3045-50) There are some resi- dent deer, but most commute to the basin from their residence in the Minne- sota River bottcralands. (T. 1073-76) Overall, the basin is valuable for wildlife habitat (T. 1178-32; MDOT Ex. 1, p. 50) It is also a very satis- fying place to observe wildlife. (T. 1650) (See also Finding 36, infra) 20. The Blackhawk Lake basin is an ecological unit and a self-con- tained wildlife unit. (T. 1387, 1654) As such, it is not unique or rare in the metropolitan area. (T. 1280) On the other hand, only four percent of the area of Burnsville, Apple Valley, Eagan and Mendota Heights is water, (DOT Ex. 14) According to Dr. Jones, a biology professor with a doctorate in nologv, the lake is in a "healthy eutroohic state" and is a good place for nature study. (T. 1266, 1278, 2914) It has been so used by a class from the Science Museum of Minnesota, and by a school class. (T. 2909, 3051) The lake is centrally located for several school districts which could utilize it for nature study field trips. (T. 3052-53) MnE'OT environmen- tal analysts identify the lake as one of the most critical, sensitive areas on the 13 Niles of proposed freeway. (DOT Ex. 14; T. 1039-90) 21. Immediately to the south of the east half of the lake is a contig- uous block of some 50 acres off dense mixed hardwoods,. (T. 1056, 2192-93) It has been grazed, which has caused a change in species mix and un-ierstorv. With grazing removed, the woods would return to a state of nature in perhaps 50 years. It is another of the six most critical sensitive areas on the 13 miles of freeway. (DCT Ex. 14; T. 10 9-90) Lawrence Westerberg, the DUR forester, does not expect anyone would manage the woods for timber harvest. (T: 2194) He would like to see the woods annexed to the community park which bounds it to the west. Trails could provide recreation and an oppor- tunity to study a weeds in transition. (T. 2194-5) The park plans do not expressly contemplate adding the woods to the park, nor are grant-in-aid funds currently readily available for such a purpose. (T. 1791-94) In all likelihood, the stand will be considerably thinned by the high -density de- velopment contemplated for the area by the city's land use plan and inten- ded to be undertaken in about five years by Dunn & Curry. (T. 1798; Eagan Ex. 8) 22. The MnDOT analysis of surface water, vegetation, and wildlife along the 13-mile segment concludes that Blackhawk Lake and the adjoining woods together constitute one of the two most critical and sensitive areas along the right-of-way (MnDOT Ex. 14. p. 39) . 23. The community park known as Blackhawk Park .is approximately 36 acres in size. (T. 1611) The park is bounded on the east by the woods referred to in Findings 21 and 22 above; it is bounded on the north by most of the south side of the west half of the lake. The park is for passive uses such. as picnicking; walking, nature observation, and cross-country skiing. (T. 1614; Eagan Ex. 3) Blackhawk Park has a state grant -.in -aids trail for the latter activity. There is a play area in the southwest cor- ner of the park which is its high point. Though designated for passive uses, the community park will double as a neighborhood park for a while un- til funds are available to establish a separate area for that type of use. (T. 1800-01) 24. The City intends to add to the park by requiring Dunn & Curry to dedicate a 200-foot wide easement for trail purpose along the lakeshore from the east edge of the park at the shore, running east, up and around the east end of the lake, then back tc the west along the north shore to the proposed freeway right-of-way. Dunn & Curry would also be required to dedicate to the city the triangle of woods which would be left between the proposed freeway (along the A-1 alignment) and the park. (T. 1611-12) 25. As the lake provides a shore for the park, so the park provides public access to the lake. The present main recreational uses of the water are canoeing and cross-country skiing by the public and by the riparian residents. (T. 223, 236, 254-55, 7871-72) 26. Blackhawk Lake rests in the bottom of a bowl which shelters it frcm noise generated outside the bowl. As a result, it is an unusually quiet place in the metropolitan area. (Ste Findings 41-60, infra) Black - hawk Lake and the howl it rests in is scenic. The City of Eagan found it sufficiently so to locate a city park there. Associated Family members appreciated the aesthetics of the setting enough to set their homes well back from the lake shore (T. 2873). DNR staff considers it so unspoiled as to qualify for Natural Environment classification under the state's shore - land management program (T. 2264) . Eagan residents who do not live on the lake and whose homes are not affected by either the proposed route or the alternate around the east end of the lake, describe the lake and its shores as ". . . an unspoiled recreational area," "unspoiled an natural area," and ". . . probably the most beautiful area in all of Eagan." (T. 223, 224, 254, 255) 27. MnDOT designers had, in approximately 1972, shown concern for the impact of the freeway on Blackhawk Lake by deciding to change the crossing from a fill to a bridge. (T. 1114) The alternate of going around the lake was not recognized by Mnrxir until the late fall of 1975. (T. 1114-1115) Work on the EIS had begun in September, 1973. (T. 45) Some of the detailed reports -- the analysis of impacts on surface water, wildlife, and vegeta- tion, for instance, had already at that time been completed. (LOT Ex. 14) The aesthetics reports did have the benefit of knowing about the alternate and were thus able to compare the two routes, and those who extracted the draft EIS from the detailed reports added information on the alternate where necessary. (See DOT Exs. 3 and 3) The final EIS benefitted by the draft review process so that it, together with the supplementary informa- tion collected at the hearing on the matter at hand provide more than enough data on which the Co,missToner of Natural Resources can make his decision. Description of I-35E Project 28. The proposed route crossing the lake is called the A-1 alternate. The route around the east end of the lake is called A-2. Each is about three miles long. They can best be seen on Burnsville Exhibits 1 and 2 (the relief models), on MnDCYT Exhibits 21 and 22 (maps), and on the large aerial photo marked MnWT Exhibit 15. A-1 and A-2 diverge on their southern end just below CSAH 30, and at their northern terminus southwest of Pilot Knob Road. Both are six lanes wide divided by a grass -covered median. The right-of-way width of each is about 300 feet. (DOT Ex. 1, p. 2) Under either alternate, the traffic volume anticipated in the year 2000 will be 71,000 vehicles per day, 5,655 of them being heavy commercial trucks. Peak hour traffic will be 6,730, of which 415 will be trucks. The peak hour volume density will reduce speeds to 35 rn.p.h. (DOT Ex. 8, p. 15) I-35--E is designed for 70 m.p.h. speeds with maximum 3% grades and 3-degree curves. (DCT Ex. 1, o. 2) 29. The A-1 route will cross the lake with two bridges separated on land by the depressed grass median. Each bridge is 354' long, supported by two piers set in the bed of the lake 109' from each end of the bridge. Each bridge is 63' wide, with three lades, two 10' shoulders, two 2' driv- er -reaction areas, and 2 high sides. (T. 404-05; DOT Ex. 19) The ap- proach fills will be outside the lakebed. (T. 407) Under the bridges, above predicted high water levels, benches for a trail will be built. The approach slopes under the bridge will be flagstone riprapped. (DOT Ex. 20) Bridge runoff will go into the settling ponds rather than directly into the lake. (T. 405, 506) The center of the bridge will be 21' to 22' above the lake.(T. 431) present ���,.,r�',�� of the 30. Each pier abutment will be built by driving perhaps 30 sheet pil- ings to make a cofferdam, excavating to a depth of 4' to 5' inside it, there driving 30 40-50-foot long hollow pilings, then filling the pilings and the excavation with concrete. (T. 407-09, 433-439) In order to mini- mize the bridge profile for aesthetic purooses (4' deep at the center of the c:ent`r span, 6' deep at the oierS , the bridges will be castin ; macn (T. 503) A temporary trestle will have to be placed across the bed to sup- port the falsework necessary to the construction method. (T. 409-10) The trestle will need an estimated 120 30-foot long support pilings. (T. 436) In total, close to 500 pilings and sheet piles will be driven into the bed of Blackhawk Lake. The pilings used in this project will not cause damage to the water quality of the Jordan aquifer. (T. 310-11, 1834-1906) Impacts 31. Both routes require much cutting and filling to convert the ter- minal moraine topography to a Freeway topography. The area of land dis- turbed by the two routes is approximately the same (A-1 = 150 acres; A-2 = 167 acres). A-2 has 35% more soil (cubic yards of cut and fill) disturbed than A-1, and is more heavily weighted to cut than A-1. (DOT Exs. 28 and 29; T. 1015, 1017, 1020) MnDOT says it can stabilize the exposed slopes so that there will not be erosion problems except during the two-year construc- tion phase. (T. 1031, 1034) During that period, MnDOT engineer Dr. Foote estimates the risk of a catastrophic erosion event with resulting sedimen- tation of Blackhawk Lake is five times greater on A-2 than A-1. (T. 1051) The absolute likelihood of such an occurrence is a function of the likeli- hood of heavy rainfalls. (T. 1034) The DNR hydrologist believes the sedi- ment settlinc pond for A-2, which would be built at the start of construc- tion, together with the use of intermediate ponds, will protect the lake from any such event as Dr. Foote fears. (T. 557, 2238-39) Water Quality 32. .Both routes will discharge run-off from their rights -of -way into settling ponds. (The original plans considered in the EIS did not provide ponding for bridge run-off.) The ponds are so constructed that when their water reaches a certain level, they will overflow into the lake. As pro- posed, A-1 will have two ponds, immediately adjacent to the lake on the north and south sides of it just to the east of the freeway. As described, A-2 will have one pond between it and the lake basin at the east end of the lake. The A-2 route will add 119.7 acres to the watershed of Blackhawk Lake; the A-1 route would add 33.4 acres. (T. 465-470, 500-507, 540-47; DOT Exs. 21 and 22) MnDCT, PCA and DNR all believe the settling ponds will effectively pro- tect the water quality of the lake. (T. 2338-39, 530) Chloride (salt) con- centration increases in the lake will be insignificant under either route, being well below levels that are known to be harmful. (T. 529, 565, 2255e 56) It should also be noted that the Eagan storm water plan will add so much more drainage area to the lake than will the freeway as to make the relative impact of chloride from the freeway even less significant. 33. It became evident during the hearing that the amount of thought which has been put into the A-2 alignment is not sufficient to rule out some changes to it which might be net improvements. The amount of cut and fill can be reduced, and the opportunity to use intermediate ponding areas for highway drainage can be enhanced by having A-2 bridge over Deerwood Drive instead of going beneath .it. Although freeway designers avoid brid- ges when they can, there might, in this case, ;e a gain. (T. 2796-97) 34 . There is the possibility of coins of construction materials ials and oil and gas into the lake during construction. iM lDGT Says it can confine the disturbance to the construction arjea by placing hay bales or some other form of pollutant filter in the lake on either side of the construction area. (T. 411-12) The DNR hydrologist is not confident that MnDOT will succeed in confinement and fears long-term effects on the lake's ecology. (T. 2258-61) He was not able to specify other cases where this has occurred, but the Examiner agrees with his opinion that the A-1 bridge construction poses a much greater risk to the lake than does the greater cut and fill and drainage area of A-2. (See T. 434-441, 445-449, 2286-2288) The only direct impact of A-2 is that a portion of its settling basin will be in the very east end of the lake bed. If intermediate ponds can be found for some of the highway runoff, which seems likely, the basin can be made small enough to stay out of the lake altogether. 35. Route A-1 clears a 300-foot wide swath through the center of the 50-acre contiguous dense mixed hardwoods forest stand previously discussed, converting a large for the area) solid woods to two small woods bordering a freeway. A-2 misses this woods completely taking a small stand at the east end of the lake. Net, A-2 takes 19 less acres of woods than A-1. (DOT Ex. 1, Q. 24) 36. That part of the woods and the lake within the A-1 right-of-way constitutes 37 acres of good wildlife habitat. (DOT Ex. 1, p. 50; T. 1178- 1182; see Finding 19, supra) The A-2 route contains no such habitat. The bridge cuts through what Professor Jones calls an "ecological community," and Mr. Fashingbauer terms a "self-contained wildlife unit." (T. 1337, 1654) All agree the lake is not unique, but Professor Jones is emphatic that treating wetlands individually as not unique is the "route to extinc- tion." (T. 1297) DNR area wildlife manager Gordon Gust acknowledg the particular val- ue of wetlands as wildlife habitat and of his work preserving the;;. (T. 2213) Fashinabauer states vigorously, ". . . 7o way can dividing a self- contained aquatic body be as satisfactory as diverting it around the end." And "A-1 is much more disastrous, has a much more severe detrimental effect on the overall body of water and the adjoining shoreline than A-2." (T. 1730-31) Fashingbauer sees the bridge as dividing the self-contained unit for the wildlife -- physically, visually (headlights) and by noise. Some creatures will pass beneath it, and some won't. Predator and prey will be forced to share the same passageway. The lights and noise of the traffic will amount to harassment of the animals, as will the vibrations from the .construction activity. (T. 1654, 1653-59, 1661, 1665) Dr. Jones believes the construction phase impact on the lake will be "revolting", that the bridge will impact and alter the lake. (T. 1290-97, 1314) Jones and Gust cannot see any real difference between A-1 and A-2 be- cause they feel the real impact on the lake and its shores and its wildlife will come from urbanization. (T. 1287, 1290-91, 2223) Fashingbauer agrees that "If the whole thing is going to be invaded by the Huns, we are all wasting our time as to whether A-1 or A-2 is completed". (T. 1745) F. sh U yb3uer sees dividing the self-contained unit as compounding the problem caused by encroaching development. (T. 1654) The Blackhawk Lake kettle is, in tact, largely protected from urbanization by the presence of the park, by the way Associated Families have developed the northwest shore, by Eagan's requiring Dunn & Curry to give a 200-foot deep easement on the rest of the lake's shore to the city, and by the setback and density provisions of the state's shoreland management program to which Eagan will soon be requirel to conform its zoning ordinance. 37. Mr. Rosas of MnDOT identified the possibility of A-2 br idg ine a gully at the east end of the lake, as a way to provide safe passage for peo- ple and animals under, over, or across A-2. (T. 2766-69) The probable den- sities on the Horne property, however, and the upgrading of Pilot Knob Road to a four -lane arterial, will likely bar the movement of animals further to the east. (T. 2229) Scenic and Aesthetic Impacts 38. One of the most troubling aspects of this whole proceeding is the irrationality of aligning the highway over "perhaps the most unique of the visible water bodies" (MnDOi Ex. 3, p. 8), and near the park when the A-2 alignment is readily availehle. The presence of a major interstate highway carrying 71,000 cars and trucks every day will surely reduce the value of the park and make it a less desirable place to be. (MnDOT Ex. 8, p. 15) In addition, there is the obvious visual intrusion of the bridge on the park and lake. The final EIS and the Aesthetic Evaluation, both of which were -pre- pared by rind, conclude that the A-2 alignment will have less aesthetic impact on the Blackhawk Lake area. (MEOT Ex. 1, pp. 75-79; MDOT Ex. 3, pp. 19-23) As the Aesthetic Evaluation points out, "A7on;:otorists using the planned recreational area will be highly aware of the visual barrier and shadow pattern of the bridge,_." (MPJJOT Ex. 3, p. 21) This conclusion is confirmed by the :many citizen witnesses who objected to the A-1 alignment because of its impact on the use of the park. (T. at 223-5, 230, 236, 244, 252, 254, 264, 266-7) 39. The scenic and aesthetic impacts of the bridge over the lake are best shown by the enlarged photographs with the bridge superimposed which were introduced by Associated Families. (AF Exs. 59(b) (view 1800 feet from bridge), 60(b) (view 1300 feet from bridge), 61(b) (view 500 feet from bridge). Each of these progressively closer views shows the dramatic vis- ual intrusion of the bridge on the lake and the park. It seems clear that lake and park users will be subjected to a significant scenic and aesthetic intrusion that will reduce their enjoyment. 40. Dr. Foote reports that construction of the A-2 alignment as now designed around the end of the lake, together with creating the settling pond, will take out all vegetation west of the right-of-way. The aesthet- ics analysis had assumed screening. However, vegetative screening can be re-established. It is also possible A-2 can be moved further to the east as it passes around the lake. Its present curvature at the end of the lake is one and one-half degrees. That can be ircreas 3 to three degrees (T. 2793). This would leave_ natural screening. This movement of the alignment is limited =v how much closer to pond JP-3 (separated from Fish Lake by Pilot Knob Road, and connected with it by a culvert) it is prudent to bring the free- way. Fish Lake is classified as a fish lake. It supports some pan fish. (T. 360-61) It has no public access other than the Pilot Knob right-of- way. In the city's storm water plan, it will outlet to JP-3, which will flow to nlackhawk Lake. Thus, proximity of the freeway to the pond will not affect the water quality of Fish Lake. (T. 2257) Noise effects might be lost in the noise from a four -lane Pilot Knob Road, given Eagan's traf- fic predictions for that road. Noise Impacts 41. Among the major impacts associated with any highway project is the noise that is generated by the vehicles using the highway. This is par- ticularly true in the case of I-35-E which will serve much of Dakota county and will constantly carry a large number of vehicles. (MnDOT Exs. 8, 11 and 13) Along with the physical presence of the highway, the noise gener- ated by the vehicles will become a permanent feature of the environment in Eagan. A number of attempts have been made to characterize the amount of noise generated. The noise contour maps presented as MnDOT Exhibits 23 and 24, PCA Exhibit 1, and the Braslau Report, AF Exhibit 54, adequately quantify the extent of noise generation for the purposes of this adminis- trative decision. While it would be better to have quantifications which take into account shielding, the lack of absorption of the water of Black - hawk Lake, noise barriers which will be built, and the depression of the highway below ground level, this level of analysis is not presently avail- able and is probably not necessary to determine those noise impacts which are "likely" to occur as required by Minn. Stat. § 1163.02, subd. 5 (1976). 42. The following table sets out PCA NAC 1 ambient noise standards, and the distances from the centerline of the freeway median that the noise standards will be exceeded. Worst dayt.tme L 10 L 50 Worst nighttime L i0 L 50 PCA Standards Distance f rcm ?.'ed ian Orlich Braslau 65 dBA 780' 1000' 60 d3A 55 d3A 1700 1983 50 dBA 2500 2900 (Memorandum on Potential Noise Impacts, AF Ex. 54, Q. 4) Dr. Breslau used a computer model similar to Mr. Orlich's, but added 2 dBA because of the 3% grade and truck climbing lane to the south of the A-1 bridge. The models assume flat grassy terrain with unobstructed line of sight. That assumption ignores the shielding provided by natural ter- rain. Braslau determined that the low barrier on the sides of the bridges will not provide effective shielding beyond 100 feet (Id. at p. 5). Breslau also estimates that if there were no freeway noise except from the bridge, the truck portion of the rusbhour tract ! c (415 trucks, 5-6 p.m.) would exceed a sound pressure level of 69 drA at 400' for eight minutes during the hour (ar. L 10 figure is for six minutes). (Id. at p. 6) Without the shielding and a 2 dBA add -on for the grade, and with 6,315 cars added to the trucks, the L 10 at 400' is 71.5 dBA. In other words, total sound protection for the non -bridge portions of the freeway provides virtually no noise attenuation for those parts of the lake and park which are in line -of -sight of the bridge. 43. In assessing the impact of the routes on residences, the EIS con- cluded that five more existing homes would be subject to noise levels above L 10 65 dBA as a result of the operation of A-1 rather than A-2. (MnDOT Ex. 1, Table 12) However, the EIS ignores the nighttime noise standards entirely and only considers one-half of the daytime standard. This tends to seriously underestimate the impact of A-1 in comparison to A-2. When the L 10 standard for nighttime hours is considered, a more real- istic assessment of the comparative impact on existing homes can be made. MnDOT Exhibit 39 shows that A-1 will cause levels above L 10 55 dBA for the 6-7 a.m. hour at 297 residential units. In comparison, A-2 will cause vio- lations at 148 residential units. 149 more homes will be affected by A-1 than A-2. This merely quantifies what is obvious from an inspection of PCA Exhibit 1 which was available at the time of the preparation of the EIS. 44. In addition to the impact on existing homes, an attempt has been made to project the impact of the L 10 55 dBA contour on "future" housing units. This is graphically represented in MnDOT Exhibits 37, 38 and 39. It is based on projected zoning of the area and concludes that about 800 more units will be affected by A-2 than A-1. While it seems appropriate to consider the effect on future housing, this attempt to quantify is somewhat misleading. First, the future housing pattern is on projected zoning and land use patterns lected. (T. 1614-1620, 1624) The current zoning map shows most of the Blackhawk area in agricul- tural usage. (Eagan Ex. 10) The expected future uses of the area are in- dicated by the Dunn PUD proposal and the Eagan "Land Use Guide." (Eagan Exs. 8 (PUD proposal) and 9 (Land Use Map); AF Ex. 39 (Land Use Plan)). The Dunn proposal is clearly flexible as evidenced by Mr. Dunn's change in alignment preference and his conversations with(1Mr. Windsor of Associated Families. (See Dill Ex. 1 at 120-121; T. at 2954-2962. ) The "Land Use Guide" is similarly flexible as evidenced by the 12 char- ges in the guide since 1963. (T. 1822) In fact, the City of Eagan has not gone so far as to adopt a comprehensive plan. (T. 1820) This indicates the very tentative nature of planning in Eagan which will undoubtedly be changed several times again before I-35-E is fully constructed. Hopefully, those changes will reflect the concerns for reduction of noise impact evi- denced at this hearing. Second, in contrast to speculative future housing patterns, the houses and people who are already along the two routes have no choice about where their homes are .in relation, to the freeway. nose who come after MnEEO'T has obtained all of its permits and routing clearances can make a conscious speculative because it is based which will change if A-2 is se- choice about living close to the freeway. Given the undeveloped nature of much of the land, it would seem appropriate to give more consideration to those who have no choice. Third, the difference in the impact on future housing units is parti- ally due to the land which is unavailable for development because of the presence of Blackhawk Park and Blackhawk Lake. The L 10 55 dBA contour for the A-1 route encompasses all of the park and most of the lake. On the A-2 alignment, the L 10 55 dBA contour takes in a small portion of the east end of the lake. Assuming the lake (say 40 acres) and the park (say 40 acres) are treated as R3 or R4 as some of the adjacent areas have been projected, the number of additional units affected is 960 (R4) or 640 (R3). This makes the numerical impact on future housing about the same for both routes. 45. The most significant noise difference between the A-1 and the A-2 alternatives is the presence of the bridge over Blackhawk Lake in close proximity to Blackhawk Park. The location of the bridge places the noise to be generated by the traffic over almost all of Blackhawk Lake and large-- •ly into the park. (See MnEOT Exs. 23 and 24) Because it is a bridge, there is very little mitigation possible. In fact, the only effective measure, road surfacing, was suggested by Mr. Perez of the MPCA and is not acknowledged or proposed by MnDOT as a noise abatement measure for the bridge. (T. 2567, 2571; DNR Ex. 1) 46. The A-2 alternative passes around the lake approximately 1800 feet east of the A-1 bridge, pulling the noise contour lines of the freeway east by that distance. Noise decreases 42 dBA per doubling of distance (T. 2469). Because A-2 has a 1% grade rather than 3%, the 2 dBA add -on for grade does not apply to A-2. The A-2 roadway, of course, generates noise which extends over the shallow end of the lake but does not reach the park. However, A-2 presents a situation that is capable of effective mitigation which should result .in no violations of standards on the lake surface or in the park. (T. 2491) 47. The following table, derived from the EIS, Dr. Braslau's report, and MnDCT Exhibits 23 and 24, compares the sound impacts of A-1 and A-2 on the lake (which for these measurements is considered to be outlined by the 792-foot contour line). Percent of Length of Lake Exposed A-1 A-2 Borst daytime L 10 70 dBA 10% 0% L 10 65 93 0 Borst nighttime L 10 55 92 1- .,10 L 10 50 100 55 48. As an examination of MnDOT Exhibit 24 and MPCA Exhibit 1 shows, the L 10 65 dBA contour extends substantially into Blackhawk Park, and the L SO 60 dBA contour (as estimated by Mr. Perez) goes even farther. (PCA Ex. 1; T. 2456-2457) Specifically, the park boundary begins at approximate- ly SOO feet from the bridge at the shore of the lake.* Thus, over 500 feet Assuming construction of the A-1 alignment and the dedication of the land adjacent to the highway but east of the park as indicated by Mr. Dunn, T. at 112, 117, the impact begins at the edge of the highway right-of-way and is therefore ever. greater. of lakeshore park property will be exposed to noise levels above the L 10 65 d3A and even more area will be exposed to levels above the L 50 60 dBA. The lake surface itself is almost entirely exposed to levels above the L 10 65 d3A and the L 50 60 dBA. 49. While the contours are based on a "worst day" hour analysis which occurs between 4-5 p.m., the trafftc projections indicate that the noise contours will be substantially the same as the "worst day" hour for ten hours each day. ,(T. 932) Thus, the areas impacted and described above will be exposed to noise levels above MPCA standards for most of the day- light hours. 50. The nature of the uses in Blackhawk Park and Lake will be substan- tially impacted by these elevated noise levels. Blackhawk Park and Black - hawk Lake are used primarily for passive recreation such as hiking, cross- country skiing, nature interpretation, and canoeing. (T. 222, 234, 236, 254-255, 260, 264-265, 2870-72, 2953-54, 3024). In fact, a trail has been established in the Park which is used for cross-country skiing. (T. 2648) The future use of the park according to the Eagan Park Development Guide is for similar passive recreational uses. (Eagan Ex. 3) While there is some indication that core active field games will also occur in the park for a period of time, the topography of the park would seem to indicate that these will be located well away from the lake. Almost all of the uses of the park and the lake are enhanced by a quiet setting. These noise intrusions above the standards will diminish the value of the uses of the park and lake and will probably lead to de- creased usage of the park and lake. (T. 2649; AF Ex. 54, p. 13; T. 2486; AF Ex. 64; Abraham Deposition, pp. 18, 21) As described by Dr. Braslau and Mr. Perez, skiers and canoeists will probably encounter interference in comprehending each other's speech at various times, both in the park and on the lake. (T. 2485, 2644) 51. Using the A-2 alternative, the L 10 65 dBA and L 50 60 dBA noise contours extend over a smaller portion of the lake and do not reach the e r'r, ^ecause the noise source is on land, it can be abated with conven- tional techniques. As MnDGI' Exhibit 23 demonstrates, the L 10 65 dBA noise contour from A-2 without mitigation only encompasses the shallow portion of the lake. The L 50 60 dBA contour, while not marked, reaches about 1500 feet which does not reach to the A-1 bridge location. (See PCA Ex. 1) The lake area impacted is much less than the A-1 impact and the park is not reached. Mntication 52. A determination of which alternative would have the greater noise impact requires consideration of mitigative measures available. Each of the no iee experts listed a number of mitigating measures, including berms, barriers, surfacing and insulation which can be used on both alignments. (MrECT Ex. 8, p. 10; T. 733, 2466-2477; AF Ex. 12) Combinations of these measures should make it unnecessary to have any but very limited violations of the noise standards. (T. 2467) The only residential areas that cannot be successfully mitigated are those areas impacted by the bridge on the A-1 route. As Mr. Orlich indi- cated cated in his testimony, even assuming total shielding, the home north and west of the bridge (the Griffiths') will experience noise levels of L 10 68 d3A. (T. 950) It follows that future housing east of the bridge in the area planned for development by Mr. Dunn would also experience levels above MPCA standards unless abatement was provided within the development. 53. The application for this permit states that no noise abatement measures are proposed by MnDOT, either on the bridge or separate struc- tures. (MDNR Ex. 1) All three of the noise experts testified that, in their experience, conventional noise abatement techniques such as berms barriers have not been used on bridges. (T. 728, 2471, 2740) In fact, none are in use on bridges in Minnesota. (Id.) 54. The only noise mitigation technique which has any applicability to the bridge is selective road surfacing with special kinds of asphalt. (T. 2518) Mr. Perez indicated that asphalt surfacing tends to attenuate the tire component of noise. (T. 2549) Since tire noise increases with speed, the amount of the reduction achieved depends on the speed of the ve- hicles. (T. 2559) While reductions up to three dBA on the L 10 and 7-8 dBA on the L 50 can potentially be achieved at 55 mph, only 1-2 dBA on the L 10 and three dBA on the L 50 can be achieved at 35 mph. (T. 2518, 2559) As Mr. Perez indicated, the mitigation achieved at 35 mph by road surface ing .is more than offset by the reflective properties of the water in Black - hawk Lake. (T. at 2559-2561) Since the noise contours predictions for the crucial morning and even- ing hours are based on a speed of 35 mph, surfacing the road with asphalt will not change the basic noise impact from the bridge. (See AF Ex. 54, p. 3 and App. I, hours 7 and 16; MnDOT Ex. 8, p. 15) However, some mitiga- tion will be achieved during hours of speeds of 55 mph. This will not elim- inate the violation of MPCA standards during those times but will reduce its geographic extent. 55. MnDOT proposes to surface the bridge with concrete which will be tined to make it rougher. (T. 423) This will increase the noise from the bridge rather than reduce it. (T. 2473) 56. In contrast to the A-1 alternative, all of the experts agree that the noise generated by the A-2 route in the area of the lake can be abated by conventional berms and barriers. (T. 811, 2490-2491, 2656-2658) The use of such abatement techniques should produce a 10-12 dBA reduction at the source and, in Mr. Perez's opinion, eliminate any violation of MPCA noise standards. (T. 2491; AF Ex. 12) One of the computer modeling tests run by Dr. the effects of shielding on noise levels. (See The most interesting result of that test, which upon consideration, is that distance is more of an than any man-made structure. Background Levels in Blackhawk Basin 57. One of the natural features of the Blackh rk basin _s tz,11z. Breslau was to determine Quiet. AF Ex. 54, Appendix II) is actually self-evident effective noise barrier or This quiet tends to enhance its attractiveness for the passive re- creation that is carried out in the basin. As the area is developed, this quiet will be dLTALnis.^.ed some nat. However, in comparison to the built-up suburban areas surrounding it, the B13ckhawk basin will continue to be a uniquely quiet area. Opinions vary as to how quiet the basin actually is. Mr. Perez, based on his years of experience, studies of similar areas and U. S. EPA studies, concluded that the background level was 35 dBA - low 40's in summer and from low 30's - high 30's in winter. (T. 2506) Dr. Braslau, based on a more intensive study, concluded that the background level was 30-35 dEA. (T. 2640; AF Ex. 54, pp. 9-11) MnDOT presented two noise measurements of 15-20 minutes each which showed a measurement of L 10 46-47 dBA. (MnDOT Ex. 40-41) While the MnDOT measurements do not appear to be a very reli- able guide to a background level (since they do not follow accepted proce- dures for making such requirements), no matter which measurements are used, the basin is a very quiet area. 58. Aside from the highway, there are two potential sources of acous- tical degradation to the basin: the airport and development around the basin. With respect to the airport, the evidence suggests that it plays no part in the background levels in the basin. Mr. Perez, who has conducted extensive studies of the airport as reflected in MPCA, Ex. 3, concluded that the takeoffs and landings had no effect on the basin. (T. 2504) This opinion was confirmed by Dr. Braslau who, in addition to his extensive aca- demic background, has been a consultant to the Metropolitan Airport Commi- ssion on airport noise. (T. 2600, 2643) The evidence indicates that the flicht paths do not fall near the basin because of the runways utilized and the operational procedures of the planes. (T. 2643-44, 2503; Dunn & Curry, Ex. 14) These conclusions are confirmed by citizens who live in the area and experience little airplane noise. (T. 2874) The Examiner notes, how- ever, that during the on -site .inspection of the basin, airplane noise in- truded upon the quietude of the area several times in the course of a three- hour time -span. 59. Increased development around the lake basin will, of course, pro- duce a slight increase in the background noise level of the basin. (T. 2728-2729) However, the unusually steep banks around the lake will tend to shield the basin and isolate it from noise intrusions from development. (Id.) This will serve to minimize the noise increase and preserve the quiet nature of the basin. 60. Assuming the A-1 alignment, the increase in noise in the lake ba- sin is 20-30 dEA. (T. 2507, 2647) Since each ten dBA increase doubles the intensity of the sound, a 20 dBA increase will make the basin four times louder, and the 30 dBA increase will make the basin eight times louder. (Id.) Both Dr. Breslau and Mr. Perez indicated that such an increase would have a significantly adverse effect on the quietude of the basin. (T. 2507, 2560) Dr. Braslau pointed out that even an increase of 15-20 dBA would dominate the environment which the noise source intruded upon and have a significant impact on the value of that area. He characterized this effect as drastic. (T. 2646-2654; see AF Ex. 54) The A-2 alignment will also have some impact on the background level of the basin but because the noise can be mitigated through conventional abatement techniques, the impact can be minimized. Delay 61. The schedule for the 13-mile segment of I-35-E is to have it all open for use in October, 1933. Mr. Linzie of MnDOT says it would take nine months to 24 months to bring A-2 up to the point where A-1 is now. Four to six months of that is to bring the design of A-2 up to the same level of de- tail that A-1 is now at. The rest is anywhere from four months to 18 months to recycle through some part of the EIS process. What is unknown is what the FHWA will require. (T. 2003-15, 2018, 2039) Mr. Roses of MnDOT gen- erally concurs with Linzie but would shorten the time by two months. Lin- zie's minimum time estimate is based on FHWA requiring only that the final EIS be amended to show A72 had been picked and why. (T. 2012) It would net be reasonable for the FHWA to require more than that since the present EIS analyzes A-2. It is noteworthy that the EIS finds A-2 environmentally mentally preferable to A-1, as is indicated by responses to the draft EIS contained in Section VII of the final EIS. by the federal Environmental Protection Agency's reaction to the final EIS (AF Ex. 48), and by the final EIS, it- self, wherein it says, at page 26, Alternative A-1 was selected because of the strong local pre- ference for it. That preference is reflected in the long history of land use planning and development that has been predicated on Alternative A-1. The local desires thus outweigh the negative environmental impacts of crossing Blackhawk Lake. (DCT Ex. 1, p. 26) 62. Witnesses called by the City of Eagan did not speak to the diffi- culties which delay would cause the city. Speaking for Burnsville, Consul- tant Dahlgren said that the state's largest regional shopping center has been built at the intersection of 35E and 35W, and that it is relying heav- ily on future accessibility to it for the St. Paul market. He said delay would be bad, particularly if it risks elimination of 35-E entirely, which would be disastrous. (T. 2125-2128) The Hearing Examiner agrees that the no -build alternative is not acceptable, but the record does not indicate that delay r isks a no -build result. Coca Cola Midwest, which does considerable shipping by truck from its plant in Eagan, sans that clogged roads in Eagan cost it $93,000 per year in increased transportation costs. (T. 2156-59) Using a 10% inflation factor to extend this figure into 1984 and 1985, this means a one-year delay in ooening 35-E could cause the company to lose a cost reduction of $165,000; and a two-year delay would represent a loss of savings of $345,000. Mr. Applebaum, who owns lards and apartment buildings, believes better commuting ing conditions would gain him $25.00 to $35.00 per month per each ren- tal unit he owns and improve the number of house sale negotiations that are successful and eliminate Apple Valley's advantage of having 35-W in place. (T. 2050-52) Dakota County Development Association President Slocum believes that delay results in increased construction costs (inflation) , and a further ex- tension of the commuting traffic and safety problems associated with the lack of I-35-E. (T. 65-67, 76, 81) The Northern Dakota County Chamber of Commerce finds the incomplete road s_'stem is bad for the business climate. ate. (T. 83-84) The City Council of Eagan, probably sharing all these concerns, has for years been passing resolutions urging parties to get on with it. (Eagan Ex. 1) Delay is not a problem for Dunn & Curry Development at Blackhawk Lake because they do not intend to begin construction of the project for more than five years. (T. 167) 63. The City of Eagan, on July 22, 1976, at the public hearing on the draft EIS submitted a written statement which includes the following: Throughout the past 16 years since the first proposed layout was presented to the Eagan Town Board, all the planning, zon- ing, utility construction and Master Plans for water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer and street systems have been coordinated with this layout. The Town Board and subsequent Village and City officials have kept the proposed corridor open, with no building construction within the proposed right-of-way that would interfere with the Freeway construction. The final EIS did not otherwise explain the importance to Eagan of its re- liance on the A-1 route over the years, so Eagan's presentation at the hear- ing on the subject permit application was largely devoted to supplying that information. 64. If the A-2 alignment is constructed, it will cost an estimated $129,500 to relocate trunk sanitary sewer lines and manholes to the north of the lake and water lines at CSAH 30. These lines were located on the assumption of A-1 before A-2 had been heard of. A-1 would require no relo- cations. That relocation expense is 3.8% of what has been spent to date installing the sanitary sewer system alone. The total eventual cost will be over $7 million. (T. 1500) Construction cost of the 13-mile freeway segment, excluding land acquisition, will be $50 million. (T. 177) A 2 will cross a trunk sanitary sewer line in four places where it had been laid so as to be crossed once by A-1. The more crossings, the higher the potential maintenance costs because of accessibility problems. (T. 1471) Even with A-1, however, there would be utility work necessitated by the Dunn & Curry proposed collector street. (T. 116) Storm sewers laid and planned will not be attested nor will be the use of Blackhawk Lake for stormwater retention. (T. 1464-65, 1477-78, 1484, 1534) 65. If the A-1 route is built and Dunn & Curry's Blackhawk Park plan becomes reality, Johnny Cake Ridge Road will likely be extended north from CSAH 30 (although there are only preliminary plans for such extension which has not been approved by the City of Eagan (T. 1463). It will swing around the east end of Blackhawk Lake and proceed further north and then east to join Pilot Knob Road just below the interchange with 35-E. (T. 1463, 1604) As currently designed, A-2 would leave no room for the collector road to skirt the lake. It could be built as planned but without the link between the north and south parts of Dunn & Curry's development at the lake. (T. 1615, 2124) Mr. Dunn believes that under an A-2 alignment, a collector road will not be needed. (T. 145, 156, 2760) It is possible that with A-2, Pilot Knob Road, which is a major artery, would also have to serve as a collector road for the land between it and A-2. (T. 1469-70) 66. A change to A-2 will cause a change in plans for Dunn & Curry's 200 acres around the southeast and north side of the east end of Blackhawk Lake. Construction s not- scheduled to bt,gin on this 1( of Dunn & Curry's holdings in Eagan for more than five gears. 2oth routes bisect this pro- perty. Mr. Dunn finds either route acceptable. (T. 100) 67. Mr. Horne Tams a 40-acre area between the Dunn & Curry property and Pilot Knob Road which is bounded in the north by the area marked "civic center" on the Dunn & Curry exhibits. i•1r. Horne bought it in 1956 in anti- cipation of there being the non -proposed interchange between 35-E and Pilot Knob Road. It is hilly and wooded which makes it suitable for residential development. Mr. Horne wants to put in 432 townhouses and apartments on the property, more than the Eagan development guide allows for. (T. 1268- 71) A-2 would be just off the west edge of his property and below it. He has been counting on a trail from his property to the park. Its loss and the greater noise and scenic impact of A-2 he considers a disaster to his plans. (T. 2173, 2175) If A-2 is built, Mr. Horne believes his property will have to be rezoned for commercial or industrial development, for which its rough terrain is not suited. (T. 2174-75) Such rezoning would proba- bly diminish the value of the property to Mr. Horne. 68. Eagan requires developers to dedicate 10% of their property for public open space (or to give cash in lieu thereof) . The agreement between the city and Dunn & Curry, which establishes densities provides for three such dedications (T. 1594). One is a narrow triangle of woods which would be left by A-1 between itself and the park. (T. 1593) It would be added to the park. A second dedication is all his shoreline to a depth of either 30-100' or 200. (T. 118, 1596-93) The third is land for the civic center which is no longer of any use to the city because it has relocated the cen- ter to the other side of Pilot Knob Road. (T. 2171-72, 2180) The agree- ment is not binding if A-2 is built, but Eagan can require the same dedica- tions for a development plan suited to the A-2 route. (T. 1612-14, 1310) Dunn assumes the shore dedication would still occur under A-2. (T. 177) A new agreement could take cash rather than the civic center and park land if Eagan wanted to develop the open space it has rather than acquire more. (T. 1791-94) 69. The Eagan systems statement which has been approved by the Metro- politan Council as required by law shows I-35-E on the A-1 alignment. (T. 1607-1603) The comprehensive plan, which is now being drafted, will have to be mod if ied if a change is made from A-1 to A-2, which will cause the city to not meet the July 1, 1930 statutory deadline for submitting such plans to the :1etrocol itan Council. Minn. Stat. § 473.869 allows for dead- line extensions. (T. 1622-25, 1842) Under A-2, the approximately ones -quarter mile wide strip which lies between A-2 and Pilot Knob Road would likely be planned for commercial de- veio rent such as office buildings. (T. 1834) Since Eagan has too ;such land zoned commercial and industrial now, such rezoning would require counter rezoning elsewhere in the city. (T. 1616-17) If the city chose not to acquire the 50-acre woods for the park, the land now in the A-1 al- ignment would go for residential development. Regardless of hew the free- way is built, the comprehensive plan (and Ulerefore, the Dunn & Curry plan) will have to be adjusted to fit the lessor density provisions of the state's shorelard management program, which apply to land within 1000 feet of the lake and thus to a considerable part of the Dunn & Curry holdings at Black - hawk Lake. Since A-2 would move the CSAH 30 interchange to the east, the land in the old and new quadrants would need to be down -zoned and upzoned, respectively. (T. 1618) 69. The record does not show that anyone built in the A-2 right-of-way in reliance on•I-35-E being routed on the A-1 alignment (although Mr. Ro- sas indicated he has seen one new home which he thinks may be taken by A-2). (T. 2786) 70. Discussion of the consequences of time delay must be considered in the context of the amount of time taken by the whole project. The plan- ning for the freeway began sometime prior to 1958 when the initial public hearings were held. (MnDOT Ex. 1, p. 20) In 1971, the Federal Highway Ad- ministration determined an EIS was necessary. (Id.) The work on the EIS did not begin until approximately two years later in September, 1973, and final completion of the EIS took four years until September, 1977. (Id. at p. 21) It has been 20 years since the inception of this project with almost six years spent on environmental analysis. Legal Discussion and Conclusions of Law 71. The Minnesota Department of Transportation has applied to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources for a permit to bridge Blackhawk Lake, a project which entails setting piers and stabilizing materials in the bed of the lake and which will change the cross-section of the lake. Minn. Stat. § 105.42, subd. 1, provides .in part: It shall be unlawful for the state, any person, partnership, associatioan, private or public corporation, county, munici- pality or other political subdivision of the state . . . to change or diminish the course, current or cross-section of any public waters, wholly or partly within the state, by any means, including but not limited to, filling, excavating, or placing of any materials in or on the beds of public wat- ers, without a written permit from the commissioner previous- ly obtained. Minn. Stat. 105.38 defines public waters as "all waters of the state which serve a material beneficial public purpose" and are not subject to ex- isting claims. Blackhawk Lake consists of "waters of the state" which are "any waters, surface or underground, except those surface waters which are not confined but are spread and diffused over the land." Minn. Stat. § 105.37, subd. 7. Blackhawk Lake serves at least two (and probably more) of the beneficial public purposes specified by Minn. Stat. §. 105.37, subd. 6: (e) Recreational activities such as swimming, boating, fish- ing, and hunting; * * * (g) Wildlife habitat areas for the spawning, rearing, feeding, and nesting of wildlife. A further such purpose served by Blackhawk lake is the retention of storm water proposed by the City of Eagan. Since Blackhawk Lake is public waters, and since setting piers in the bed of public waters is an activity controlled by Minn. Stat. 5 105.42, a permit is required for the proposed construction. 72. Minn:Stat. 105.45 provides in part: If the Commissioner concludes that the plans of the applicant are reasonable, practical, and will adequately protect public safety and prom to the public welfare, he shall grant the per- mit, and, if that e in issue, fix the control levels of pub- lic waters accordingly. In all other cases the commissioner shall reject the application or he may require such modifica- tion of the plan as he deems proper to protect the public in- terest. In all permit applications the applicant has the bur- den of proving that the proposed project is reasonable, prac- tical, and will adequately protect public safety and promote the public welfare. (Emphasis added) The permit applicant in cases of this nature thus carries the burden of proving that the project proposal will serve the overall public inter- ests indicated. The provision that "In all other cases the commissioner shall reject the application or he may require such modification of the plan as he deems proper to protect the public interest", creates a pre- sumption of denial unless the applicant submits at least a prima facie. case for the granting of the permit. In re Application of the City of White Bear Lake, Minn. 247 N.W.2d 901 (1976), states this rule in another way: "In administra- tive proceedings, the general rule is that an applicant for relief, bene- fits or a privilege has the burden of proof," citing 73 C.J.S., Public Administrative Bodies and Procedure, § 124. "In this state, the burden of proof generally rests on the one who seeks to show he is entitled to the benefits of a statutory provision." In re Application of the City of White Bear Lake, supra, citing 7A Dunneil, Dig. (3ed.) sd 3468 and 3469. 73. It is important to keep in perspective that the reasonableness and utility of the completion of I-35-E is not at issue. The issue is in- stead whether building a three-mile segment over Blackhawk Lake as opposed to around the lake is in the public interest. While both Minn. Stat. 105.38 and 105,45 require that projects in public waters adequately protect the public welfare and safety, neither specify the factors to be considered in making that determination. While there is no "cut and dried" approach to such decision -making, the adminis- trative regulations found at 6 MCAR 1.5020-1.5029 promulgated according to the Administrative Procedures Act, Minn. Stat. § 15.01 et seq., provide specific standards and criteria to consider in granting permits under Minn. Stat. a 105.42. The stated -purpose of those regulations is "to provide for the orderly and consistent review of permit applications in order to conserve and utilize the water resources of the state in the best interest of its people." (Emphasis supplied.) 6 MCAR § 1.5020(A). Validly adopted regulations have the force and effect of law and bind DNR as well as others. Minn. Stat. s 15.0413, subd. 1. They thus provide standards in addition to the Minnesota Env ironmental Pol icy Act, which will be discussed later, by which to judge whether alternative A-1 will promote the public welfare and safety. 74. DtdR's policy regarding filling into public waters is expressed by 6 MCAR 9 1.5021(A) : It is the policy of the Department to limit the placement of any fill material into public waters in order to preserve the natural character of public waters and their shorelands, and maintain suitable aquatic habitat for fish and wildlife. (Em- phasis added), -21- The piers of the proposed bridge and materials to stabilize the base of the lake constitute "material placed or intended to be placed on the bed or bank of any public water," and are thus "fill" under the definition of 6 MCAR s 1.5020(D). Residents of Eagan consider Blackhawk Lake and its shores "an urt- spoiled natural area," "probably the most beautiful area in all of Eagan." DNR staff considers it so unspoiled as to qualify for Natural Environment classification under the state's shoreland management program. The place- ment of four :passive piers in the bed of the lake, rising to a height of 22 feet above the NOHW level of the lake is not in keeping with the depart- mental policy of promoting the public welfare by preserving the natural character of public waters and their shores. 75. The proposed bridge and piers constitute structures in public waters, and as such are regulated by 6 MCAR § 1.5023(A): It is the policy of the department to discourage the waterward occupation of the beds of public waters by off -shore naviga- tional facilities, retaining walls, and other structures in or- der to preserve the natural characterof public waters and their shorelands, and provide a balance between the protection and utilization of Public waters. . . . (Emphasis supplied) Specifically prohibited are structures which will be detrimental to significant fish and wildlife habitat, or protected vegetation, provided that "Public need is documented and outweighs adverse environmental impact" and "the proposed construction is of sound design and is not unnecessar- ily obtrusive or visually incompatible with natural surroundings." 6 :.ICAR § 1.5023(f)(2)(a) and (c) (Emphasis added) That the structure is unneces- sarily obtrusive to public waters is demonstrated by the fact that there is an alternative available. It is clear that a six -lane freeway bisecting the lake is obtrusive and visually incompatible with natural surroundings. During peak traffic, the number of vehicles traversing the area will approach 7,000 per hour, including many trucks down -shifting to climb the 3% grade of the bridge along A-1. This intrusion of vehicles and the resulting noise will dimin- ish the quality of the area for recreation, probably the most important of its beneficial public purposes. The area will lose its attraction for those who previously relaxed in its serenity and solitude. Birdwatchers will have d if f iculty hearing the calls of the birds that remain in the area. Canoeists and hikers will have difficulty conversing with their companions. In short, the recreational value of the area will be so iirr paired as to destroy the balance between utilization and protection which the regulation mandates. 76. The administrative regulation placing limits on the construction of bridges is 6 MCAR 1.5025 (A) , which states DNR policy: . . . to allow crossings of public waters, including the con- struction of water intake and sewer outfall structures in public waters, only where less detrimental alternatives are unavailable or unreasonable, and where such facilities ade- quately protect public health, safety and welfare. Such crossing shall not be permitted where the project . . . 4. Will be detrimental to water quality, and/or significant fish and wildlife habitat, or protected vegetation. (Emphasis added) This regulation creates a presumption that requests For water cross- ings will be denied unless less detrimental alternatives are unavailable or unreasonable. However, it is not necessary to reach the question of whether less detrimental alternatives are available here since the regula- tion prescribes an outright prohibition against certain detrimental pro- jects, and alternative A-1 is included in the fourth category of prohibited projects. Highway construction over Blackhawk Lake will destroy 37 acres of wild- life habitat. The songbirds, raptors, shorebirds, small mammals and deer which inhabit the area will be harassed by noise, vibration, lights, and blockage of their passageways. The number of road kills will likely in- crease. While at present, the lake is too shallow to maintain a variety of fish, Eagan's storm water management plan could result in raising the water level of the lake sufficiently to make the lake good for fish. DNR favors installation of an aeration system which would result in an additional fishery for the metropolitan area. The construction phase of the bridge presents substantial threats to the water quality of the lakes through spills of oil, gas and materials. While methods to reduce the risk of such detriments have been proposed, the spirit of the regulations is to avoid rather than reduce such risks where possible. Thus, the crossing of Blackhawk Lake is contrary to the standard established by a third administrative regulation. 76A. DNR has promulgated regulations specifying minimum standards for municipal ordinances governing the management of shorelands. See Minn. Reg. NR 82-84. Such ordinances are required under "Minn. Stat. § 105.435., Municipalities :gust enact shoreline management ordinances which conform with DNR regulations within one year of receiving notice to comply from the Commissioner. Minn. Stat. § 105.435, subd. 6. If a municipality fails to adopt a shoreline management ordinance within the required time, or if the municipality fails to bring the ordinance adopted into compliance with DNR standards, the Commissioner may adopt an ordinance, rules or regula- tions for the municipality. Minn. Stat. § 105.485, subd. 6. The use of the shorelands of Eagan . for an interstate highway is in ob- vious conflict with the purpose of the:Shoreland Management Act to preserve and enhance the quality of surface waters, preserve the economic and natural environmental values of shorelands, and provide for the wise utilization of water and related land resources of the state. Minn. Stat. § 105.435, subd. 1. See also Minn. Reg. NR 32(a). The proposed use of shorelands specifically conflicts with sions of NR 83(c) (2) (aa) (i) which establishes a 200-foot minimum from the NOHW for areas with Natural Environment classification. the provi- setback Place- ment of a bridge and an average of 71,000 vehicles per day through an area appropriate for Natural Environment classification is not a wise utiliza- tion of Blackhawk Lake and its related land resources. Regardless of the choice of route Eor the freeway, Eagan's zoning plans and consequently Dunn & Curry's plans will require revision to conform to the lesser density provisions of the ohorsia,i:a ent rnan�g. m program within 1000 feet of the lake 77. Even if : rOCT could meet its burden of proving that the proposed project is consistent with DNR regulations, the proposed action would still be required to comply with provisions of the i i innesota Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) and Minnesota Environmental Rights Act (MERA), Minn. Stat. Chs. 116D and 116B. Permits will only be granted if they comply with "A11 ap- plicable provisions of law existing at the time of issuance of the permit or thereafter enacted by the Legislature." Minn. Stat. h 105.44, subd. 9(3). 78. The current environmental movement in Minnesota was launched in large part with the passage of the Environmental Rights Act, Minn. Laws 1971, c. 952. This law created certain judicial remedies for citizens to challenge private and governmental actions which adversely affect the en- vironment. The 1973 Legislature enacted the Environmental Policy Act, Minn. Laws 1973, Ch. 412 (coded as Minn. Stat. Ch. 116D), which imposed on state governmental agencies the duty to review any adverse environmental ef- fects of certain permits which are issued by them. The two acts contain many similar considerations and the latter act was obviously written in contemplation of the earlier one. As statutes in Hari materia, they, and cases construing them, should be read together. State v. Kuluvar, 266 Minn. 408, 123 N.W. 2d 699 (1963). Minn. Stat. 5 116D.04, subd. 6, provides in part: No . . . permit for natural resources Management and develop- ment /shall/ be granted, where such action or permit has caused or is likely to cause pollution, impairment, or de- struction of the air, water, land or other natural resources located within the state, so long as there is a feasible and prudent alternative consistent with the reasonable require- ments of.the public health, safety, and welfare and the state's paramount concern for the protection of its air, water, land and other natural resources from pollution, impairment, or -de- struction. Economic considerations alone shall not justify such conduct. "Natural resources" are defined for the purposes of this Act by Minn. Stat. s 1168.02, subd. 4, as follows: Natural resources shall include but not be limited. to all min- eral, animal, botanical, air, water, land, timber, soil, quiet- ude, recreational and historical resources. Scenic and aes- thetic resources shall also be considered natural resources when owned by any governmental unit or agency. 79. That Blackhawk Lake and the city park near the proposed construc- tion constitutes protected natural resources is not in issue. Nearly all of the categories of resources listed in the statutory definition are repre- sented in the area. Blackhawk Lake itself is presently used for the recreational purposes cf canoeing and cross-country skiing. Its shores support a variety of vege- tation. South of the east half of the lake are 50 acres of dense mixed hardwacds. This timber has been identified as one of the six most critical sensitive areas on the 13 miles of freeway, as has Blackhawk Lake. The lake basin is of high value for wildlife habitat compared to other types of areas and is considered by one expert to be a self-contained wild- life unit. It supports songbirds, raptors, shorebirds, small mammals and deer. while the fish population of the lake, when last checked by DNR, was limited to bullheads, the installation of an aeration system could convert the lake to a viable fishery. The A-1 right-of-way covers 37 acres of wild- life habitat. The 37-acre city park bordering the lake is used for picnicking, walk- ing, nature observation and presently as a neighborhood park. Grant-in-aid funds have been made available to Eagan to develop cross-country skiing trails in the area. The Blackhawk Lake area is an ecological community, providing vegetation, wildlife habitat and important scenic and recreation resources to area residents. The lake basin is particularly quiet for the metropolitan region. MEPA and MERA were intended to protect and preserve areas such as this. this.80. Minn. Stat. s 116B.02, subd. 5, defines "pollution, impairment or destruction" as . . . any conduct by any person which violates or is likely to violate, any environmental quality standard, limitation, regu- lation, rule, order, license, stipulation agreement, or permit of the state or any instrumentality, agency, or political subdi- vision thereof which was issued prior to the date the alleged violation occurred or is likely to occur or any conduct which materially adversely affects or is likely to materially adverse- ly affect the environment; provided that 'pollution, impairment, or destruction" shall not include conduct which violates, or is likely to violate, any such standard, limitation, regulation, rules, order, license, stipulation agreement or permit solely because of the introduction of an odor into the air. (Emphasis added) The same definition is applicable under MEPA. Minn. Stat. E 116D.04, subd. 5(e). Two formulations of what constitutes pollution, impairment or destruc- tion of natural resources are posed in the above definition: (1) Conduct which is likely to violate an environmental quality standard or regulation or permit, and (2) Conduct which is likely to materially adversely affect the environment. 81. The A-1 route would violate the Pollution Control Agency's ambi- ent noise standards for the lake and the park area. According to the tes- timony of Orlich and Braslau, during the worst day times, the daytime stan- dards will be exceeded 10°% of the time at distances of 780-1000 feet from the median of the highway. During the worst nighttime hours, nighttime standards will be exceeded 10% of the time at 1700-1982 feet from the me- dian, and 50a of the time at 2500-2900 feet from the median. 82. It is impossible to overlook the adverse effects of a six -lane freeway bisecting an unspoiled natural area and adjacent timber. stand. The bridge will create a formidable and unavoidable visual barrier detrimental to aesthetic appreciation of the area. The intrusion of 71,000 vehicles per day will not escape the notice of persons who formerly visited the area for quiet and solitude. Neither will the noise, lights and highway escape the notice. of ani- mals which had formerly made the basin their harp or resting place. The bridge and supports will create a barrier that many animals will not cross. Others will be dissuaded from use of the area due to the fact that predator and prey will be relegated to the same path. Road kills will probably in- crease. Recreational use of the lake will also be impaired. Canoeing and cross-country skiing will be a different experience with the rush of cars overhead creating noise levels exceeding 60 dBA. Spills of oil, gas and materials into the lake during the construction phase could impair the vegetation, animal life and water quality of the lake. In County of Freeborn v. Bryson, (Bryson I), 297 Minn. 218, 210 t1.W.2d 290 (1973), the Minnesota Supreme Court reviewed a proposal to place a coun- ty road thorugh,a 7-1/2 acre marsh by filling the marsh, thus consuming 0.7 acre of water surface. The facts which the Court relied upon in Bryson I in prohibiting proposed highway construction on the basis of material ad- verse effect under Minn. Stat. § 116B are as applicable to Blackhawk Lake as they were to the Bryson marsh: (1) The highway would divide a natural marsh; (2) The entire marsh is an ecological unit; (3) The construction would eliminate some of the area's natural physical assets; (4) The highway would be a relatively high-speed, high - volume roadway which would increase animal fatalities; and (5) The quietness and solitude of the marsh would be dis- turbed. (Emphasis added) A prima facie case of pollution, impairment or destruction was thus estab- lished, and has been established with regard to Blackhawk Lake. 83. The burden of proof with regard to an action under MERA is de- tailed in Minn. Stat. 3 116B.04. The first paragraph of Minn. Stat. § 116B.04 spells out the burden of proof where an action is brought under the MERA, and the subject of the action is governed by "any environmental qual- it_y standard, limitation, regulation, rule, order, license, stipulation, agreement, or permit promulgated or issued by the pollution control agency, department•of natural resources, department of health, or department of agriculture." in this situation, the defendant does not have the option of presenting an affirmative defense by showing that there is no feasible and prudent alternative. Here the defendant :rust introduce evidence to rebut the prima facie case of violation or lose the action. Parties favoring the A-1 route have not attempted to rebut the asser- tion that A-1 would violate PCA ambient noise standards. Their own expert testified that such standards would be violated. The proposed construc- tion would also violate the setback requirements of the Shoreland Manage- ment Act and is contrary to the policies expressed in four separate environ- mental quality regulations. (See Findings 74, 75, 76 and 76A, supra.) 84. The second paragraph of Minn. Stat. § 116B.04 outlines the burden of proof with reference to conduct causing pollution, impairment, or de- struction but not governed by an environmental quality regulation or one of the other standards listed in that statute. Once the prima facie showing of pollution, impairment or destructioon of natural resources has been made, the defendant may take two courses: (1) rebut the prima facie show- ing by the submission of evidence to the contrary; or (2) allege an affir- mative defen_e. Proponents of A-1 rely heavily on allegations of an affirmative de- fense. The affirmative defense reuuires proof of the following two conten- tions: "There is no feasible and prudent alternative," and "the conduct at issue is consistent with and reasonably re- quired for the promotion of the public health, safety and welfare in light of the state's paramount concern for pro- tection of its air, water, land and other natural resources from pollution, impairment or destruction. Economic con- siderations alone shall not constitute a defense hereunder." (Emphasis added) Minn. Stat. § 116B.04. Minn. Stat. 5 116D.04, subd. 6, also incorporates a feasible and pru- dent alternative standard, stating that no permit for natural resources management and development shall be granted where such permit is likely to cause pollution, impairment or destruction of natural resources "so long as there is a feasible and prudent alternative consistent with the reasonable requirements of the public health, safety, and welfare and the state's par- amount concern for the protection of its air, water and other natural re- sources." In allegations of an affirmative defense under. MEPA or of no feasible and prudent alternative under MEPA, and generally with reference to the per- mit acplication, the burden of proof is on the parties favoring the environ- mentally damaging route. When the parties having the burden of proof fail to sustain that burden, the decision as to that issue must go against them. Howard v. Marchildon, 228 Minn. 539, 37 N.W. 2d 833 (1949). 85. The fundamental contention presented by MnEOT and intervenors fa- voring the requested permit is that there is no feasible and prudent alter- native to the A-1 route. The Minnesota Supreme Court has determined that the purpose and lan- guage of Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended, 49 U.S.C. s 1653(f), and the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act are substantially the same. County of Freeborn by Tuveson v. Bryson, 309 Minn. 178, 243 N.W. 2d 316 (1976) (Bryson II). Thus, it is appropriate to look to federal court decisions interpreting the federal act in interpret- ing our state act. Citing Citizens to Preserve Overton Park v. Volpe, 401 U.S. 402, 91 S.Ct. 814, 28 L.Ed. 2d 136, the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals defined "feas- ible".and "prudent" as used in the Department of Transportation Act of 1966 as follow: A feasible alternative route is one that is compatible with sound engineering . . . and a prudent alternative route is one that does not present uniaue problems, that is, an al- ternative without truly unusual factors so that the cost or community disruption would reach extraordinary magnitudes. . (Emphasis added) Monroe County Con:ervati0n Council v. Volpe, 472 E.2d 693, 700 (2nd Cir. 1972). Parties favoring A-1 have not contended that the A-2 alternative is not feasible in the engineering sense in which it is used in the statutes. They instead pro_ ose two objections which, they contend, indicate that :A-2 is imprudent: economic consideration_, largely due to delay in con.:truc- tion, and frustration of planning. Neither of these is unique or extraor- dinary within the standard of Overton Park so as to render the A-1 route imprudent. 86. Both federal and state statutes disregard or minimize the weight which will be given to economic considerations in determining whether a feasible and prudent alternative exists. The Minnesota statute specifical- ly states "Economic considerations alone shall not justify such conduct," that is, conduct significantly affecting the quality of the environment. Minn. Stat. §§ 116B.04 and 116D.04, subd. 6. The federal statute as inter- preted by Monroe, supra, takes cost into consideration only when truly un- usual factors cause it to reach "extraordinary magnitudes" not reached where proposed routes would displace 120 single dwellings, 100 single apartment units, 900 persons, 7 businesses, 1 church, and 1 lodge; or 377 single families, 1508 persons, 21 businesses, and 2 churches. Louisiana Environmental Soc. , Inc. v. Coleman, 537 F.2d 79, 86, Fn. 6 (5th Cir. 1976). In liaht of this, it seems an exaggeration for A-1 proponents to claim economic harp of "extraordinary magnitudes" where the only direct, quantifiable cost to any party consists of $129,500 for relocation of a trunk sewer line and water line in Eagan, an amount representing only 3.8% of what has been spent to date installing the sanitary sewer system alone. A-1 and A-2 would serve the purposes of commuters or transport to shopping areas equally well, and neither route is disruptive to existing develop- ment. 37. Eagan has been pressing MnDOT to proceed expeditiously with con- struction along the A-1 route since June 30, 1970. MnDOT's attention to the public concern over delay in this project is of recent origin. El -MA approval was requested in 1971, at which time it became clear that an EIS was required. MnDOT did not begin work on the EIS until September, 1973. A draft was completed approximately three years later in June, 1976, and the final EIS came out in May, 1977. MnDOT did not apply to DNR for a permit to cross Blackhawk Lake until May, 1978. Any problems attributable to a severrmonth to twenty-four month delay could have been alleviated in the six -year period during which MnDcfr moved toward completion of the final ETS. Both the J.S. and Minnesota Supreme Courts recognize that challenges to environmentally sound routes are bound to arise from various economic in- terests. Born courts have specifically held that environmental legislation was not designed to allow for wide-ranging balancing of economic, social and environmental Factors. County of Freeborn v. Bryson, supra, (Bryson II); Citizens to rreserVe Overton Park v. Volpe, 401 U.S. 402, 91 S.Ct.814 (1971). The U.S. Supreme Court ruled: But no such wide-ranging endeavor intended. It is obvious that in most cases considerations of cost, directness of route, and community disruption will indicate that parkland should be used for highway construction whenever possible. Congress clearly did not intend that cost and disruptions of the community were to be ignored by the Secretary. But the very existence of the statutes indicates that protection of parkland was to be given paramount importance. The few green havens that are public parks were not to be lost unless there were truly unusual factors present in a ;articular case or the cost or community disruption resulting from alterna- tive routes reached extraordinary magnitudes. If the stat- utes are to have anymeaning, the Secretary cannot approve the destruction of parkland unless he finis that alternative routes present unique problems. 401 U.S. at 411-12, 91 S.Ct. at 821. Similarly in Minnesota, the use of parkland and lakes will be found most "convenient" when balancing the costs and community disruption of tra- versing lakes and natural areas against a route for which urban development is planned. However, if the Environmental Policy Act is to have any mean- ing, it ,means that environmental matters are entitled to paramount consider- ation, not merely equal footing with economic and social considerations.• As put forth by A-1 proponents, delay is largely an economic consideration and as such cannot be balanced against environmental factors to establish an affirmative defense. Minn. Stat. Rs 116D.04, subd. 6, 116B.04. 88. Even if delay were not construed as an economic consideration, the amount of delay at issue here does not constitute a "truly unusual factor." Additional time for the formulation of detailed designs is an inherent part of any change in proposed route required under federal or state environmental legislation. Estimates of the total additional time required to implement A-2 range from seven to twenty-four months. (Claims of longer delays are exaggerated or extremely unlikely.) In Louisiana Environmental Soc., Inc., v. Cole- man, 537 F.2d 79 (5th Cir. 1976), rehearing denied 540 F.2d 1085, the Fifth Circuit rejected the contention that a delay of at least ten years before an alternate route for a highway could be approved was a "unique factor" which would justify the use of parklands over an alternative route under Overton Park, supra. A fortiori, a delay of less than two years cannot be held to render the A-2 route imprudent. Tn suocort of its decision, the Fifth Circuit analogized delay as a re- sult of initially planning an environmentally unsound route to statutory violations which expose the offender to a penalty. "If time is the penalty, it cannot be turned into a sanction which justifies noncompliance." Lou- isiana Environmental Soc., Inc. v. Coleman, supra, 540 at F.2d 85. Delay which is attributable to planning an environmentally unsound route cannot be held to provide an affirmative defense for parties who planned and pro- moted that route. 89. The City of Eagan claims a harm based on the frustration of its _planning efforts. Eagan has zoned lands and laid out water, sewer and street s`vste:ms assuming use of A-1 for the freeway, and Eagan contends that this justifies building along an environmentally damaging route. The Minnesota Supreme Court spoke to substantially the sage conten- tion in In re Ar_ol ication of the City of White Bear Lake, Minn. 247 N.W. 2d 901 (1976). That case arose out of an application for a permit under Minn.Stat. sh 105.42 to fill a bay of Birch Lake to construct a road- way. Like Eagan, white Bear Lake claimed it had assumed that the route through the lake would be approved and it spent S50 ,000 on planning, de- signing and land costs for the proposed route. The Supreme Court respon- ded, "The fact that the city has expended a substantial amount of money in preparation for an environmentally damaging project does not require that project's construction." 247 N.W. 2d at 906. Similarly, commercial interests contend that they have planned the de- velopment of their real estate assuming the freeway would follow the A-1 route though actual construction has not begun. In MPIRG v. White Bear Rod and Gun Club, Minn. , 257 n.W. 2d 762 (1977), the gun club at- tempted to defend a claim under MERA by alleging hardship since the acqui- sition of land had been completed and operations begun. The Supreme Court noted that the trial court "had expressed deep concern because of the de- fendant's substantial investment." 257 N.W. 2d at 781. But the Court found that the defendant had prior notice of the limitations on its environ- mentally destructive behavior and that the hardship was one "'which the club itself chose to risk from the beginning.'" Id. MERA has been in effect since 1971, and MEPA since 1973. Eagan and developers have had ample opportunity to inform themselves of the restraints on environmentally destructive conduct. In planning on the basis of an en- vironmentally destructive route, .the., have assumed the risk that construc- tion along that route would be prohibited. As in MPIRG v. White Bear Rod and Gun Club, supra, the risks of economic harm and frustration of plans are risks which these parties assumed and they do not render the A-2 route imprudent. 90. Acceptance of the theory that prior planning presents a barrier to altering a route to conform with sound environmental policy would frus- trate the purposes of state and federal legislation. Courts have deter- mined that the federal environmental legislation codified at 23 U.S.C. s 138 applies to ongoing projects, Arlington Coalition on Transportation v. Volpe, 458 F.2d 1323 (C.A. Va. 1972), cert. den. 93 S.Ct. 312, 409 U.S. 1000, 34 L.Ed. 261; Concerned Citizens for the Preservation of Clarks- ville, 445 F. 2d 486 (5th Cir. 1971), and Minnesota follows this practice. In virtually every instance where a projected highway route has been known to the public, plans will have been developed with that route in mind. The efficacy of the policy of applying environmental legislation to ongoing projects would be greatly diminished or eliminated if that application were precluded by prior planning. It is in the nature of planning that revisions are required. To plan is to project a scheme of what might be, making a "best guess" as to un- knowns. The City of Eagan, Dunn & Curry, Mr. Howe and Mr. Horne all acted on the basis of such a projection, guessing that the three-mile stretch of freeway at issue would be built along the A-1 route. When environmental law determines that that three-mile stretch cannot be located according to the planner's best guess, it is the plan which must bend, not the law. It is important to keep in mind that to remedy the majority of the harms claimed to result from planning on the basis of the A-1 route, Eagan and the private developers need only revise their plans. In fact, some 1-2- vision will be necessary in any case for the area to conform to the require- ments of Minnesota's shoreland management program. With the exception of a small segment of Eagan's sewer and water lines, no previous construction will be destroyed, no ongoing businesses will be shut down. That the • • Supreme Court in M.PI G v. :mite Bear Rod & Gun Club, supra, found it con- s istent with environmental legislation to permanently enjoin an ongo iri business further :minimises the significance of developers' claim of harm due to frustration of mere plans. Neither economic harms nor planning by municipalities and commercial interests are the A-2 route first element so unique or reach such extraordinary magnitudes as to render imprudent. Proponents of A-1 have failed to establish the of an affirmative defense. 91. When an applicant chooses to present an affirmative defense to the prima facie case of pollution, impairment or destruction of natural re- sources, the burden of proof does not stop with showing that there is no feasible and prudent alternative. It must also demonstrate that the con- duct at issue is consistent with the reasonable requirements of the public health, safety and welfare. Minn. Stat. 5§ 1163.04, 116D.04, subd. 6. The applicant's evidence as to this contention must be evaluated in light of "the stace's paramount concern for protection of its air, water, land and other natural resources from pollution, impairment or destruction." Id. Conduct which materially adversely affects natural resources cannot be consistent with public health, safety and welfare. The proposed con- struction violates numerous regulations passed as elements of an interwoven plan to preserve our remaining natural resources. The EIS states unambig- uously that A-1 negatively impacts 3lackhawk Lake. To contend otherwise is to intentionally ignore the adverse impacts of freeway activity, visual ob- struction and noise on the recreation resources and the aesthetic apprecia- tion of the Blackhawk Lake Basin. Further, a feasible and prudent alternative is available which does not have material detrimental aspects. The following chart compares the effects of the two routes: Resources Impacted Wildlife Habitat Mixed Hardwood Timber Water Quality Land Ecological Unit City Park Scenic/Aesthetic Value of Lake A-1 Impacts 37 acres destroyed 300 ft. swath through center of 50-acre stand Danger of oil, gas and material spills 150 acres disturbed Bisected into two segments by the bridge Highway nearby the park; likely to cross trails Visual barrier at the center of the lake A-2 Impacts 0 acres destroyed Small timber stand at east end of the lake taken Danger of erosion and sedimentation during construction 167 acres disturbed; cut and fill re- quired could be re- duced by design im- provements Highway forms a border at one end of the unit Highway 1850 ft. removed from the park Will not obstruct a view of the entire lake from the park or residences Quietude of Lake and Park Quietude of Residential Areas Recreational Lake surface almost entirely exposed at levels above L 10 65 dal' and . L 50 60 dBA L 10 65 covering 400 ft. of lakeshore park property L 50 60 cov- ering more than 400 ft of lakeshore park property Levels above L 10.55 dBA at 6-7 a.m. at 297 residential units Noise can be miti- gated except for areas impacted by the bridge Value for nature study and quiet recreational activities diminished by traffic overhead Abatement can elim- inate violation of PCA standards since noise source is on land Noise contours par- allel to a-1 moved 1800 feet east, not reaching the park Levels above L 10 55 dBA at 6-7 a.m. at 148 residential units Noise at all resi- dential locations can be mitigated Disturbance of high- way minimized by noise barriers and and distance To contend that A-2 is imprudent since it is also environmentally dam- aging is to reduce the application of environmental protection statutes to absurdity. It is obvious that the construction of any freeway -- indeed, of any sidewalk -- involves the disturbance of some amount of soil and vege- gation at least. To apply MEPA and MERA to enjoin any disturbance of nat- ural resources would halt virtually all highway construction: and frustrate the endeavor of the act to enjoin conduct likely to have a material adverse effect on the environment. A 2 presents a feasible and prudent alternative to the adverse effects on A-1. Proponents of A-1 have failed to meet their burden of proving A-1 • is consistent with the health, safety and welfare of the public. The sug- gested affirmative defense to pollution, destruction and impairment of nat- ural resources must fail. 92. The Examiner has examined and reviewed all briefs and proposed findings submitted by the parties to this proceeding. Facts or subjects to which testimony was directed and which are not addressed in this Report are considered by the Examiner of little or no significance to a determina- tion of the questions and issues raised. Based on the foregoing, the Hearing Examiner makes the following CONCLUSIONS 1. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources duly acquired and has jurisdiction in this matter. 2. All parties have fulfilled all relevent, substantive procedural requirements of law and rule. 3. The evidence presented at public hearing does not establish that the Applicant, the Minnesota Department of Transportation, is entitled to a permit under Minn. Stat. s 105.42. 4. The proposed action is likely to cause pollution, impairment or destruction of natural resources. 5. The partLC:favoring the i-1 route have not t met their burden of proof under the Minnesota Environmental Protection Act and Minnesota En- vironmental Rights Act. 5. In the final analysis, the Hearin; Examiner is convinced that the feasible and prudent route for I-35-E is :A-2. The key question for Mn/DOT is: Why co through the lake when you can go around it? Common sense in- dicates that the highway should go around the lake; Minnesota's statutes, rules and intercretive cases dictate that the highway must go around the lake. Based on the foregoing, the Hearing Examiner makes the following RECOMMENDATIONS 1. That the permit aoolication of the Department of Transportation be denied; and 2. That additional study be undertaken to minimize drainage to the Blackhawk Lake area during construction and after completion of the high- way so as to maximize enjoyment of the area on both sides of the highway by design and implementation of natural sound and sight buffer or barriers. Dated this 9th day of November, 1973. Ie. MYROti S. GREENBERG 6 Hearing Examiner ADDRESS REPLY TO: OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 373 CENTENNIAL OFFICE BUILDING SAINT PAUL. MINNESOTA 55155 Telephone: (612) 296-3294 WARREN SPANNAUS ATTORNEY GENERAL STATE OF MINNESOTA December 26, 1978 Mr. Maclay R. Hyde Lindquist & Vennum 4200 IDS Center 80 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 Re: I-35-E Blackhawk Lake Crossing Our File No. W 784 Dear Mr. Hyde: This letter is to inform you that the Division of Waters staff of the Department of Natural Resources is currently drafting a permit which will be issued to the Minnesota Department of Transportation to enable that agency to construct Interstate 35 E on the route known as "A-2" in the Blackhawk Lake proceedings. In response to your inquiry, no further applications or review is required prior to such issuance. DAK:gvp Very'truly yours, DONALD A. KANNAS Special Assistant Attorney General Department of Natural Resources AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER ADDRESS REPLY TO: OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL. RESOURCES 375 CENTENNIAL OFFICE BUILDING SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55155 Telephone: (612) 296-3294 LINDQUIST & VENNUM Attorneys at Law IDS Center - Suite 4200 Minneapolis, N1 55402 Attn: Maclay R. Hyde Dear Mr. Hyde: WARREN SPANNAUS ATTORNEY GENERAL STATE OF MINNESOTA December 28, 1978 This letter is in response to your inquiry concerning the progress being made in the approval of the storm sewer plans of the City of Eagan. I was told by Kent Lokkesmoe, Regional Hydrologist, that the Department of Natural Resources at this time has no problems with the overall concept of the Eagan plan as presented. However, it is not the Department's intention to issue a blanket approval for the entirety of such plan until greater detail is available. We envision the review, possible alteration, and subsequent approval of each phase of the construction to be completed contemporaneously with the development of the plans for such construction. Further information concerning the details of current negotiations and the approval process is available from Tom Colbert, the Director of Public Works, and Bob Rosene, Engineering Consultant, for the City of Eagan, both of whom have been working closely with Department of Natural Resources' personnel on the project. DAK:ha cc: Kent Lokkesmoe r-Very tru3.y yours, DONALD 'A. NNAS Spec. Asst. Attorney General Department of Natural Resources AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER 07, \NNESO). \416 37 t i ° TOF TBW December 29, 1978 Minnesota Department of Transportation Transportation Building, St. Paul, MN 55155 r. Tora i`edijes City Administrator City of Eagan 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, :innesota 55122 In r. eoly refer to: 319 S.P. 192. (I-35E) Vicinity of Blackhark Lake Dear :r. :!edges: Phone Following is information regarding ::In/DOT policy concerning reimbursement for relocation or adjustment of eVistiig utilities affected by Interstate highway construction. Li/DOT policy states the following: ".':iienever the relocation of any utility facility is nececsi sated by the caestruction of a route included in the national stem of Interstate r-h :a,';rs, including urban extensions thereof, the State will reimburse ,be utility for =.tom actual comet of relocation. The State, ho:rever, c`n:?ot Pay for any costs for which the ?ederal Government will not reimburse the State." The authority for this rolicy is contained in : iinneso i;a Statutes Section 161.46. Therefore, if the A-2 design around Elack'_iar:k Lake is eventually selected, any necessary adjustments to existing city utilities, including sanitary sewers ,rill be accomel.is'r_ed at Federal and State expense, provided such ad justn eats are considered a replace?lent "in :inner. Sincerely, Richard P. Braun Deputy Commissioner Bureau of Operations An Equal Opportunity Employer The Associated Families desires an expeditious completion of I-35-E in the A-2 corridor east of Blackhawk Lake. As stated in the Findings of Fact and Order of the Commissioner of Natural Resources, "It is a condition of any such permit (for the A-2 route) that MnDOT must obtain approval from DNR of the final plans and specifications, which shall show that reasonable effort has been made to minimize its impact on the lake and the park". We wholeheartedly endorse this recommendation and that of the Hearing Examiner, "that additional study be undertaken to minimize drainage to the Blackhawk Lake area during construction and after completion of the highway so as to maximize enjoyment of the area on both sides of the highway by design and implementation of natural sound and sight buffer or barriers." Further, the Associated Families supports the concept of the Eagan storm sewer plan as described in last summer's I-35-E hearing. Eagan and its neighbor Apple Valley, should be commended on their very progressive storm sewer plans. The basic concept is to maximize the use of available holding basins, being careful to provide upstream sedimentation protection for the major recreational lakes of the area. Of course, every reasonable effort should be made to insure that the storm water is ponded prior to reaching Blackhawk Lake to provide the best possible removal of nutrients and sediment. Such drainage planning in our type of terrain is much less expensive and less environmentally damaging than direct drainage to the Minnesota River. Although the DNR has not as yet formally issued permits for the implementation of this plan, they wholeheartedly endorse this enlightened approach to the problem. In summation, Associated Families supports the speedy completion of the modified A-2 I-35-E, and the concept of the Eagan storm drainage plan, with attention to reasonable minimum environmental impact. To be read at City Council meeting Jan,2, 1978. 1 REPORT ON REVIEW OF STOW DRANAGE FACILI'i'IES FOR EAGAN, MIS _VESOTA 1972 BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS ST. PAUL, MINN. 'Baose9.htaa, /a iene, ril otde4tIJJ L 410cialeA., Jisc. east:W.11u" estgisiee/id .2335 20. Tizustla dtiyl va 36 s1. Paul, Miitstesala 55113 /7lsone: 636-4600 July 10, 1972 Honorable Town Board Tom of Eagan 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55122 Re: Eagan Storm Sewer Review Our File No. 604964 Gentlemen: Otto G. Bonestroo, P.E. Robert W. Rosene. P.E. Joseph C. Anderlik, P.E. Bradford A. Lemberg, P.E. Robert D. Frigaard, P.E. Richard E. Turner. P.E. James C. Olson, P.E. Lawrence F. Feldsien, P.E. Glenn R. Cook, P.E. Charles A. Erickson Richard IV. Foster Keith A. Gordon Donald J. Grover Thomas E. Noyes Transmitted herewith is our report on the review of storm drainage facilities for Eagan Township. The information contained in this report is intended to provide a basis for the development of an adequate and economical storm drainage system throughout the entire Township. Problems involved in the construction and design of this storm sewer system have been reviewed and discussed in the body of the report. This report provides detailed information on pipe sizes, flows, pond areas, pond capacities and pond water levels through the entire Township. Two maps are included which show the layout of the drainage system and the area sub- divisions which were used in the report. It is important that storm sewer service be developed as presented in this report and that pond storage requirements be met as development progresses. If this plan is followed, adequate facilities will be maintained and future duplication of lines will be unnecessary. This report contains general information only concerning the preliminary design of storm sewer facilities. Additional information in the form of computations and work sheets which form the basis of the proposed layouts and recommendations is available upon request. After the Board has had the opportunity to review this report, we will appreciate the opportunity to discuss all parts of this study with you in detail at your convenience. h• Respectfully submitted, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. `- Robert G. Schunicht RGS:kf I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. LAY l(oI)P4t bert U. Rosene Date: July 10, 1972 Reg. No. 3488 1 a _.J INDEX Page No. LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL 1. INDEX 2. INTRODUCTION 3. TOPOGRAPHY 4. DESIGN CRITERIA 4. Runoff 5. • Storm Sewer 7. Ponding Areas 9. Pond Type A 14. Pond Type B 15. Pond Type C 15. Pond Type D 16. Pond Type MP 16. SYSTEM DESCRIPTION 13. General 18. Major Area A 18. Major Area B 19. Major Areas C, D and H 19. Major Areas E,F,G, and I 21. Major Area J 22. Major Areas K and L 22. COSTS AND FINANCING 23. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 26. APPENDIX A Drainage Areas APPENDIX B Design Flows APPENDIX C Pond Data APPENDIX D - Cost Estimates APPENDIX E - Lift Station Detail FIGURE NO. 1 - Rainfall Chart FIGURE NO. 2 - Pond Mass Diagram FIGURE NO. 3 Pond Types FIGURE NO. 4 - Future Outlets FIGURE NO. 5 - System Layout Map FIGURE NO. 6 Drainage Areas 2. iL L INTRODUCTION The purpose of this report is to supplement and update the original compre- hensive "Report on Storm Drainage Facilities" dated June 14, 1965. That report dealt with the design of a storm water removal system in selected areas of Eagan in which rapid development was expected. It is hereinafter referred to as the 1965 Report. In the seven years which have passed since the 1965 Report was issued, a great deal of development has occurred in the Township. Much of the recent development has been of a commercial, industrial and multiple family dwelling type. This fact along with expected development in areas which were not covered in the 1965 Report make this supplement necessary. It is the intention of this report to update the 1965 Report on the basis of the latest available data. Recent zoning changes and plattings and projected land usage as well as existing storm sewer have been incorporated into this report. The function of a storm sewer system is to minimize economic loss and incon- venience due to periodic flooding of streets, basements and other low lying areas and structures. The point at which cost of damage attributable to storm flooding plus the cost of storm sewer installation reaches a minimum is the desirable economic end point. Economy is not the only consideration since storm sewer in- stallations reduce the danger and disruption to traffic as well as minimize other oazards and inconveniences associated with flooding. If a planned program of storm system construction is established in early developmental stages, much duplication and waste arising from haphazard installations can be avoided. This report presents a comprehensive storm sewer plan for the entire Township and parts of neighboring Villages which drain into Eagan. The comprehensive plan includes a layout of the storm sewer trunk system and ponding areas with major and 3. minor drainage districts defined. Pond high water levels and the amount of storage required in each pond have been established. The size and capacity of the proposed and existing storm sewers are also given. TOPOGRAPHY The general topography has been previously described in the 1965 Report and is equally pertinent to this report. In most cases, the drainage districts described in the 1965 Report have been used in this report. Changes have been made only where developments changed the natural drainage. The Township of Eagan has extremely rugged terrain that is pocketed with many ponds and dry holes. The natural drainage of the land is toward the Minnesota River although much of the storm water runoff ends up in ponds which presently have no outlet. It is planned to eventually provide overflow outlets for almost all the ponds to the Minnesota River. Several crossings of Interstate 35 will be required in the system. It is important that these crossings be held to a minimum due to the high construction cost involved in such a crossing. The comprehensive plan calls for four crossings. These crossings should be made before construction of the Freeway is completed and when possible done in conjunction with other utility construction. If these crossings are deferred until after the Freeway is completed, the pipes must be jacked into place beneath the pavement under rigid specifications while open trench construction is allowed before the highway is completed. DESIGN CRITERIA The capacities of storm sewers are computed on the basis of a selected design storm return interval and the volume of ponding allowable in a certain drainage district. The construction cost is largely dependent on the capacity of the sewer. 4. As the capacity and thus the size of a storm sewer increases, the cost of instal- lation rises sharply. So, after the quantity of runoff in a particular area has been determined, a decision must be made as to the size of a storm sewer and the amount of protection which can be economically justified for the area. RUNOFF Storm water runoff is defined as that portion of precipitation which flows over the ground surface during and for a short time after a storm. The quantity of runoff is dependent on the intensity of the storm, the amount of antecedent rainfall, the length of the storm, the type of surface the rain falls on and the slope of the surface. The intensity of a storm is described by a return storm interval which designates the average period of years in which a storm of a certain magnitude is expected to occur one time. Thus the degree of protection is determined by selecting a return storm interval to be used as a basis for design. Complete protection against large, infrequent storms of 50 to 100 years can be justified only for important flood control projects. For most urban areas like Eagan, the construction cost of a large capacity storm sewer system is much greater than the amount of property damage from flooding caused by a storm which a smaller capacity system could not accommodate. Experience has shown that the rate of runoff from a five year frequency storm is adequate for the design of storm sewer in most urban areas. This means that the capacity of the storm sewer system will be exceeded on the average of once every five years. The excess runoff caused by storms of greater than five year frequency will be accommodated by ponding in low spots at catch basins in streets for very short periods of time and by flowing on overflow drainage routes. Flooding in the streets and overland drainage will eliminate much of the damage to property which would occur if these facilities were not provided. 5. A number of methods have been developed to determine the expected ratebof runoff from a known area. The most widely used method today is the "ratiamal method." The "rational method" involves the selection and/or computation:af a time of concentration and a runoff coeffecient. The time of concentrationdis the time required for the runoff to become established and the flow from the m¢tt remote point (in time, not distance) of drainage area to reach the pointaftdesign. It is assumed that during the time of concentration, the entire drainage area is contributing runoff to the design point and the maximum rate will occur atsthis time for a specific design frequency storm. It is also assumed that the pek rate of runoff is a direct function of the average rainfall intensity -during the time of concentration, varying only with the runoff coefficient. Once the time7of concentration is determined, the average rainfall intensity for the designts;torm can be taken from the graph in Figure No. 1. _n A minimum concentration time of twenty minutes was selected for desigtZi As the runoff enters the system, the flow time in the storm sewer is added to the concentration time resulting in a longer concentration time and a lower average rainfall intensity as the- flow moves downstream from the initial design point. The runoff coefficient is the percentage of the rainfall falling on an area that must be carried away by a conveyance system. This coefficient depends on numerous watershed variables such as soil perviousness, ground slope, vegetation, surface depression and type of development. The runoff coefficient varies,:from a low of 0.2 for parks and farmland to a high of 0.95 for asphalt and concrete sur-• faces. This means that 20% to 95% of the amount of rain falling on an area will eventually become storm runoff. The present runoff coeffecient in Eagan is.much less than it will be when the township is entirely developed. The values will increase with the decrease in the amount of pervious surface caused by street sur- facing, lawn development and grading. In the determination of the runoft ceeffi- 6. cients used in designing Eagan's storm sewer system, the Township zoning map and preliminary development plans were used. An average coefficient for a certain area was then determined based on expected percentage of roof areas, streets, lawns, parking lots, etc. Table I gives the coefficients used for the various types of developments found in Eagan. TABLE I Type of Development Runoff Coefficient (C) Park .2 Single Family Residential .4 Multiple Family Residential .5 Coaumercial and Industrial .6 The runoff rate is then computed using the "Rational Formula": where: STORM SEWER Q = CiA Q = the runoff rate in cfs C = the runoff coefficient i = average rainfall intensity in inches/hour A = the drainage area in acres The capacity of a storm sewer is dependent on the pipe slope, diameter and the roughness of the inner surface pipe. This capacity is measured in volume per unit of time or, in this report, cubic feet per second (cfs). Once the rate of flow in cfs is determined by the Rational Equation and the slope selected, the diameter of the pipe can be determined. Computations for sewer capacity were based on the Mannings formula using a roughness coefficient of .013. This coeffi- cient takes into account head losses due to bends and manholes in the system. 7. L L The storm sewer alignment and pipe sizing are shown on Figure 5. The capacities of the pipe are given in Appendix B. The alignment is general in nature since future development will determine the exact location of the storm sewer. The lines shown follow natural drainage draws and the existing slope of the terrain so any variation from the alignment shown should be kept to a minimum whenever possible. The pipe sizes are also general since they are based on an assumed slope which will be dictated by street grades when an area is developed. The pipe capacities given in Appendix B are the controlling criteria and should be provided for when the final design of the system is completed. It is extremely important that each area be re-evaluated at the time of final design to confirm the design criteria used in this study and to make any changes that the proposed development dictates. Special consideration must be given to areas developing as commercial and industrial establishments that are not presently zoned as such. Proper design of storm sewer requires that all sewer lines be provided with access through manholes for maintenance and repair operations. Spacings of man- holes should be no greater than 500 feet for lines 18 inches to 30 inches in diameter. Intervals on larger diameter lines can be increased since the pipes have large enough diameters to permit a man to enter. Regardless of sewer size manholes should normally be provided at all junction points and at points of abrupt alignment or grade changes. Major storm sewer trunks and related facilities, only, have been considered in this study. A complete working system consists of trunks, manholes, laterals, leads, catch basins, intakes and all correlated items. Proper design throughout the total system is as important as within the storm trunks. All storm sewer facilities and especially those conveying large quantities of water at high velocities should be designed with efficient hydraulic character- istics. Special attention should be given during final design to these lines that 8. have extreme slopes to provide adequate energy dissipation from high hydraulic heads. Pipes of large diameter should be of curved design. Manholes and other structures at points of transition should be so designed and constructed to provide gradual changes in alignment and grade. Pond outlet control structures should be designed to allow water movement in natural flow line patterns to minimize tur- bulence,to provide good self cleaning characteristics and to prevent damage from erosion. Intake structures should be liberally provided at all low points where storm water collects and at points where overland flow is to be intercepted. Inlet structures are of special importance as it is a bad investment to have an expensive storm sewer line flowing partially full and flooding property due to inadequate inlet capacity. Inlets should be placed at all major street inter- sections and so located to eliminate overland flow in excess of 1,000 feet. Intake grates and openings should be of self cleaning design to minimize capacity reduction when clogged with twigs, leaves and other debris. It is very important that con- sideration be given to each intake to ensure adequate inlet capacity. This is especially true in rolling areas where steep grades allow excessive carry-over with conventional grates. The desired structure is one which will not produce a hazard or hindrance to traffic and still provide the required inlet capability. In some cases, specially designed intakes with increased inlet area and oriented more normal to the direction of the water flow may be necessary. These are all details of final design. PONDING AREAS The numerous ponds and depressions found throughout Eagan Township have been incorporated into the storm drainage system as ponding areas. The ponding areas 9. provide locations where ponding caused by restricted flow can be allowed without any damage due to flooding. The effective use of ponding areas enables the installation of outflow sewers of a much reduced capacity because the design storm duration is increased over the total time required to fill the ponding reservoir. The storm sewer represents a sizable investment to a community and this investment can be more efficiently utilized by ponding storm waters in these predesignated ponding areas and allowing a smaller diameter pipe to empty them. In effect, the storm sewer pipe is being utilized a greater percentage of the time, since an equal amount of •water is discharged at a lesser rate. Equally as important as the cost considerations are the use of ponding areas to return the storm water to the ground water table and to develop water amenities in developments for aesthetic, recreational and wildlife purposes. Recharge of the ground water table is maximized by using ponds with seepage outlets or with very limited overflow outlets. Amenity aspects are maximized by careful planning in the initial development of any residential or industrial area and by integrating the ponding system into the park development program wherever possible. The ponding areas and high water levels are shown on Figure 5 and data on the ponds is provided in Appendix C. The ponds are identified by a letter corresponding to the drainage district in which they are located followed by the letter P to designate a ponding area and then by a number to differentiate between the ponds that are found in a certain drainage district. A pond that is located in drainage district A and is the fourth pond in that district has been numbered AP-4. The ponds shown on the layout map are essential to the overall system and every effort should be made to incorporate all the ponds shown into the system. There are a number of ponds and possible ponding areas which have not been included in the overall system. The use of these ponds in lateral systems should be encouraged 10. since their use will lower -the cost of the laterals. The importance of ponding areas to an economical, well -designed storm sewer system cannot be overemphasized. In the 1965 Report a number of ponds were designated as seepage ponds, that is, ponds which have storm water inflow but from which no pipe outlet is provided. In their natural condition, the only outlets provided.to these ponds are evaporation and seepage. In a natural pond, a long term balance between runoff from precipitation and water loss from evaporation and seepage exists. A normal water level in these ponds has usually been established due to this balance. Over the years, organic material and silt have been carried into these ponds by the runoff. This material along with the decomposing of aquatic vegetation and algae on the bottom forms a layer of impervious material sealing the bottom and limiting seepage. During wet periods, the water level rises and greater seepage occurs in the band of flooded land around the pond above the normal water level. As the land surrounding a pond is developed, the rate of runoff increases. The extra water added by this increase in runoff upsets the balance established over the years. In most ponds, this imbalance will then cause frequent flooding of the surrounding area and large fluctuations in pond elevation. These ponds could remain at flood stage for many months during an extended wet cycle. This uncontrolled ponding could inundate parks and private land and back up storm sewers causing ponding in streets and at inlets for long periods. Development around such ponds if very difficult to plan as it is impossible to forecast exactly the effect of long term wet cycles and large storms on such a pond level. For these reasons, all but a few of the seepage ponds have been provided with some type of outlet. The few ponds that will not have outlets are extremely large in relation to their drainage area with a large storage capacity and are 11. 3 = Li capable of discharging sufficient amounts of water through evaporation and seepage to prevent damage due to flooding. After several years of flooding and discharging the water by seepage through the band around the pond, that band may become sealed by silt and organic material. This process is similar to the process that previously sealed the bottom of these ponds. It is very important that the seepage rate from these ponds be maintained and periodic grading of the band around these ponds may be required to accomplish this. Most of the ponding areas collect runoff from relatively large drainage sheds. Since the locations near ponding areas are choice building spots, it would be very serious if miscalculation of water quantities arising from overly conservative design criteria resulted in frequent flooding above the designated high water levels causing property damage. To provide additional protection against such a possibility, the design storm interval for ponding areas was set at 100 years as compared to five years for storm sewer design. In most cases, this added safety factor in pond design results in only slightly higher flood elevations. The cost of this desirable feature is low since most ponding areas have ample storage capacity. Overflow routes should be provided and maintained from all ponds when- ever possible to minimize economic damage and inconvenience if storage capacities are exceeded under unusual conditions. Runoff determinations for pond design varies from storm sewer calculations also. The critical storm for storm sewer design is the short duration, high intensity storm, whereas the critical storms for pond design are of long duration since the runoff is being held and released at a slow rate. It was previously stated that runoff is directly related to rainfall intensity. Figure No. 1 is a graph showing the relationship of rainfall intensity to storm duration for a five and one hundred year frequency storm characteristic of the Twin City Area. The 12. ri rapid decrease in average rainfall intensity during the first four or five hours emphasizes the advantage of ponding water from short duration high intensity storms. The pond inflow is computed using the runoff coefficient for a drainage area and the rainfall intensity for a storm of progressively longer durations. The inflow to a pond can then be plotted as shown in Figure 2 which is a mass diagram of a pond draining 100 acres. This inflow line represents the accumulative flow that could enter the pond during the design storm interval. When the rate of outflow is plotted on the diagram as a straight line, the vertical ordinate between inflow and outflow quantities represent storage required for that particular duration of storm. The maximum ordinate designates the maximum storage volume necessary for the pond under the design conditions and also shows what storm duration can be expected to produce the highest water elevation. In actual analysis, inflow into many downstream ponds contain some previously ponded water. The mass diagram concept can be applied in that case also, but as the pond chain becomes larger, a more complicated inflow pattern is established. Storms of longer and longer durations produce the critical pond conditions. The shape of the inflow curve varies markedly from that shown in Figure 2, but the method of storage capacity determination remains similar. The straight line designating the rate of outflow assumes a constant rate of discharge from the pond. Theoretically, the rate of discharge will vary slightly as the pond eleva- tion changes under emptying and filling action, however, these variations are not significant in most cases. The mass diagram example of Figure No. 2 gives inflow quantities computed for a 100 acre tributary area. Outflow is set at a rate of 10 cfs which requires a storage capacity of 440,000 cubic feet. This outflow rate is higher than is desirable from a pond and is used only for illustrative purposes. In actual design, 13. I 71 `i the outflow rate would be lower, thus using more of the storage capacity available in the pond. The pond outlet devices controlling the outflow to the desired rate should be designed to be capable of allowing a certain amount of outlet variation. This will enable a high degree of flexibility in the drainage system for additional control. As a matter of policy, pond outlet structures should be designed to provide a low outlet rate to a pre -determined pond elevation. This will allow the additional capacity in the downstream pipes to accommodate short duration, high intensity storms. Upon reaching the overflow elevation the ponded water will then be allowed to pass through the outlet at the design rate. This will provide an additional safety factor since the overflow will occur during longer duration storms which do not produce the critical flow in the downstream reaches of the storm conduit. The ponds can be classified into four types depending upon their outlet and storage characteristics. Those types of ponds are illustrated in Figure 23. Ponds have been further differentiated between those which may not require an outlet, the seepage ponds previously described, and ponds for which an outlet is essential. Future outlets have been shown for some of these seepage ponds. The various pond types are explained in the following paragraphs. TYPE A This pond is the most frequently occurring. It is a permanent pond with storage volume acquired by a differential in water levels. The outlet elevation is set considerably above the pond bottom and acts as a gravity outlet operating only when the elevation of the water is above the normal water level. Provided that seepage and evaporation losses do not exceed replenishing, a permanent body of water is maintained. 14. l 3 TYPE B This is a permanent pond provided with an outlet through a pumping station. This type of pond usually occurs at the low point in a drainage district or in a few cases a pumped outlet has been provided when it proved to be less expensive than a gravity outlet. The water is pumped to the nearest point from which gravity flow can again be established. The storage volume in a pond of this type is used to reduce the required capacity of the lift station. TYPE C This pond is normally dry during dry weather. The basin is either a naturally occurring depression or is artificially produced by the construction of an embank- ment across a drainageway. The controlled outlet of this type pond is located to provide complete drainage of the basin. Inlets discharging into the area are normally located on opposite ends of the outlet point so that some overland flow exists in any storm condition. A shallow ditch -shaped passageway should be constructed in these ponds to confine overland flow from the pond inlets to the outlet points during storms of low intensity and during emptying periods. In cases where development and economics allow, a small diameter pipe should be placed below the pond bottom to allow low flows to be carried directly to the outlet which will help eliminate nuisance and erosion of the pond bottoms during an average small storm. If it is desirable and economically feasible, a permanent pond can be erected in this type of basin. This can be done either by dredging out material below the present bottom of the basin or in cases where the hydraulics of the system allow it, the outlet can be set so it will leave five to six feet of water in the basin. If a permanent pond is desired, it can be incorporated into the system at the time of final design. 15. r. 3 1 r J a j L L .1 TYPE D This pond is a basin that is also dry during normal weather, but the outlet to this pond is provided by a lift station. All the characteristics and permanent pond possibilities that applied to a Type C pond also apply to this pond. TYPE (* )P This pond can be any of the above mentioned ponds. The condition that differentiates this pond from the others is a large storage capacity with a relatively small drainage area. These ponds are proposed to be the seepage ponds, meaning that there is enough storm water storage in these ponds so that seepage and evaporation over a long period of time can provide sufficient outlet control. If at the time of final design conditions have changed and an outlet is necessary, future outlets have been set for this type of pond. The (*) designates the type of outlet that could possibly be provided for this pond. Thus a permanent pond that would possibly require a pumped outlet would be described as a (B)P type pond. All ponds should'be re-evaluated during final design when all factors affecting the runoff, storage and seepage of the pond have been determined. An ideal storm water pond is one which has a large surface area and steep side slopes which combine to provide substantial storage volume for storm water. Most of the ponds in Eagan are excellent storm water ponds and can be used in their natural state. In ponds which do not have the desired ponding capacity, this capacity can be provided in various ways. The two most common ways are building a dike to block a drainageway and thus cl-eating an artificial pond or dredging out an existing pond or swamp to increase the storage capacity. The increase provided by these methods will reduce the size of the overflow pipe required and result in 16. L1.1 a savings in pipe cost to the Township. Dredging is proposed for ponds AP-21 and AP-1 in Eagan. Other ponds may require either dredging or diking but this will have to be determined at the time of final design. In an area such as Eagan, in which much development is taking place, the storm water runoff frequently contains substantial quantities of solids. This is due to large amounts of earth work being done and lack of grass and other plants in the areas that are being developed. As a part of a storm sewer system, it is desirable to provide for the removal of these solids from the storm water before the water enters the ponds. This can be accomplished through the provision of siltation basins similar to the one that is being constructed in Fish Lake, or by any other type of structure that will settle out solids. Ideally, some sort of solids removal system should be installed whenever a storm sewer outlets into a pond. However, in the system that is planned for Eagan which includes over 150 ponds, it is probably not economically nor physically possible to provide solids removal at every pond. In some cases, rectangular concrete settling chambers lame enough to provide the removal of sand and gravel can be economically installed at pond outlets in lieu of the larger siltation basins. All such added features will require periodic maintenance to be effective. The location, number and type of solids removal system will have to be established at the time of final design. With even the best and most expensive solids removal system, contamination of our ponds and lakes will occur unless careful attention is given during develop- ment and continually thereafter in the use of the land. Developers must minimize erosion by careful grading practices and the replanting or sodding of bare areas as soon as possible. Streets must be kept clean by conscientious effort from citizens to avoid littering and by frequent street sweeping to remove sand, dirt 17. Il L and litter before it is washed down the storm sewer. Chemicals such as calcium chloride must be minimized in ice control programs on our streets and highways. Citizens must make judicious use of fertilizers and other chemicals which, when washed into the ponds, may cause degradation of the water quality. The only truly effective way to keep a high quanity of water in ponds and lakes is to prevent the undesirable materials from entering the storm sewer. Complete interception or treatment at the point of discharge is neither practical nor economically feasible. SYSTEM DESCRIPTION GENERAL The study area was divided into twelve major drainage districts shown on Figure No. 6 and designated as areas A through L. Areas A, C, D and H have direct natural drainage to the Minnesota River. The remaining areas drain to one or more major ponding areas from which an outlet to the River has been provided through areas A, C, D and H. All areas except parts of areas L and K will have outlets to the Minnesota River. Future outlets for these areas have been shown but it is very unlikely that they will ever be required. All the major areas were further subdivided as shown on the area subdivision map (Figure No. 6) with minor subdivisions labeled with a letter and number. A tabulation of all area subdivision acreage is given in Appendix A. MAJOR AREA A This area is located on the west boundary of the township and is the largest area in the study. Storm sewer outlet to the Minnesota River is provided in four locations with one being the existing facility presently serving Cedar Grove Additions 1 through 4. 18. ; i7" Since the 1965 Report was written, storm sewer which serves the remaining Cedar Grove Additions and other nearby developments has been installed. This system presently outlets into a drainage ditch along Trunk Highway 13 after passing through two ponding areas. This system is designed to eventually be extended downstream to cutlet to the Minnesota River and upstream to drain a major part of the District. Another separate trunk storm sewer is proposed to run along Cedar Avenue, west of the Cedar Grove development. A minor trunk is proposed to drain the northwest corner of the Town. The layout :nap (Figure No.5.) gives pertinent information including the storm sewer sizes, routings, ponds high water levels and storm water lift stations required in the proposed system. Two gravity crossings of 35E are required in this area. As mentioned before, these crossings should be installed prior to the completion of the Freeway. MAJOR AREA B Area B contains 1,750 acres in the central portion of Eagan Township. Drain- age is northward through a series of ponds and terminates at Blackhawk Lake. The runoff from approximately 200 acres in District L is pumped into Thomas Lake at the very south end of the district. The entire storm water runoff from District J flows into Blackhawk Lake by gravity from Fish Lake. Blackhawk Lake presently has no natural outlet. A lift station with a capacity of 23 cfs will eventually be required to provide an outlet for this lake. The lift station will pump to point A-p. MAJOR AREAS C, D, AND H Areas C, D and H all provide outflow to the Minnesota River. Areas C and H are located entirely to the northwest of Interstate 35E and do not require crossing of that Freeway. Ponding is used in these areas but not as extensively as in other districts. It is possible to maintain reasonably sized storm sewers because of the 19. steep ground slopes existing as the land drops off toward the river. The storm sewer has been routed through pronounced ravines in many cases and should be installed there at ultimate development. Until construction in these ravines is possible, overland drainage in the natural gullies and ravines will serve, provided proper crossing controls are maintained. Erosion can be kept to a minimum by the maintenance of heavy vegetation cover in these drainageways. In extreme cases, the construction of check dams to reduce flowing velocities may also be required. From the standpoint of erosion control, all areas newly developed should be re- quired to be seeded immediately to control runoff. Problems have been encountered with raw graded areas discharging uncontrolled runoff into lower areas where the sand and silt is deposited. Immediate establishment of vegetation growth will minimize this problem and should be a requirement of all developments. Lemay Lake or Pond DP-2 is a very important part of the system in Area D. The outlet for this lake is already in place alon3 with a sewer which carries the runoff from part of Eagandale Industrial Center No. 1 to the Lake. The lake serves as a reservoir for the runoff from the entire part of Area D that is east of Interstate 35E. Three lift stations are required to pump the runoff from that area to a gravity line which flogs into Lemay Lake. One crossing of the Freeway will be required at the pond. The major part of the storm sewer that is required in Area 11 has been installed as part of Eagandale No. 1 development. The pipe presently outlets to a ravine near Pilot Knob Road and the proposed location of Interstate 494. An outlet to the Minnesota River is now provided by a natural overland drainageway. Two outlets to the Minnesota River are required in Area C. All storm sewers, ponds and lift stations in Areas C, D and 11 have been tentatively sized and located and are shown on Figure No. 5. 20. i • MAJOR AREAS E. F, G AND I Areas E, F, G and I are located in the northeast portion of the Township. All four areas are characterized by large drainage areas which drain into one major pond in each district. The majority of the area in these districts is zoned commercial which indicates that the runoff coefficient is high and the quantity of storm water runoff is extremely large. Calculations have shown that an outlet for each of these districts must be provided. The outlet will be provided by a series of lift stations that will connect ponds from each of the districts and eventually pump the runoff to Area H where it will flow by gravity to the river. Area G covers the extreme east central part of Eagan and also drains a part of Inver Grove Heights. There is one major pond (GP-1) which eventually receives the runoff from the entire district. The land south of this pond is extremely flat and reletively large storm sewers are required in this part of the district. It is necessary to provide a pumped outlet from Ponds GP-2 and 3 to Pond GP-1. These two ponds flooded Highway 55 during the 1965 flood and are a problem area since they drain an extremely large area without having a large storage capacity. The overflow from Pond GP-1 is pumped to Pond EP-2. The majority of the proposed storm sewer for District E was installed as part of Eagandale Industrial Center 2, 3 and 4 development. The entire area drains to two major ponds designated EP-1,2. These ponds are presently interconnected and together have a very large storage capacity. This capacity makes it possible to reduce the size of the lift station required at these ponds to only ten cfs, although the ponds receive the runoff from both Areas G and E. Area I also drains to a large chain of ponds which require an outlet provided by a lift station. The flow will be pumped to pond FP-5 and will flow by gravity to Pond FP-1. 21. t Area F is the major problem area in the entire system. The major pond in the area (FP-1) has a relatively small storage capacity but has a large surface area. In addition to taking the direct runoff from a large area and the overflow from four ponds in Area F, Pond FP-1 receives pumped floes from areas E, G and I. To prevent damage by flooding an extremely large lift station is required at this pond. The overflow is pumped to a point in Area H from inhere it flows by gravity to the Minnesota River. Area F contains over 250 acres that are part of Interstate 494 and Mendota Heights. At the time of final design, a drainage agreement between the three parties involved must be made to solve the drainage problems in this area. Presently Pond FP-1 and its lift station are designed to take a flow of ten cfs from Interstate 494 and Mendota Heights. Wherever possible in this District, minor ponding areas should be used to minimize peak floes. MAJOR R AREA J Area J covers a major part of the center of Eagan Township. The area is divided into many minor subdistricts and the runoff from these subdistricts ends up in ponds which presently have no outlet. Since the drainage areas are extremely large compa.__. _o the size of the ponds, outlets will have to be provided in most cases. There are a total of eight lift stations that must be installed in this district. Most of area J eventually drains to Fish Lake (JP-4) from which it flows by gravity to Blackhawk Lake and is pumped into Area A. MAJOR AREAS K AND L Area I: is a small area in the southwest corner of Eagan that includes a small part of Apple Valley. Subdistrict K-3 drains naturally into Burnsville, but a pumped outlet through District A was found to be relatively inexpensive and can be provided if desired. Pond KP-2 in Apple Valley is a seepage pond with a future outlet being shown. 22. Area L is a large area which covers the southeast part of Eagan and parts of Apple Valley. The ponds in this district are characterized by extremely large storage capacities. The low point in the area is Holland Lake (LP-38) and most of the runoff drains naturally to this lake. A system of trunk storm sewers is proposed to carry runoff from a large part of this district through a series of ponds to Holland Lake. The lake is very large and it is felt that sufficient water will be lost through evaporation and seepage so that no outlets will have to be provided. Pond LP-6 which drains approximately 200 acres requires an outlet which will be provided by a lift station and forcemain to Thomas Lake (Bp-7) in District B. The remainder of the ponds in District L will be dead-end ponds with only future outlets being shown. Figure No. 4 shows the possible outlets for all the ponds which according to present calculations require no outlets. If conditions change and calculations at the time of final design show the need for an outlet, these outlets i•will have to be provided. The Dakota County Park takes up a large area in District L. Since very little development will take place on this land, the storm water runoff will be small. The amount of runoff will be only slightly higher than the amount presently pro- duced by the land in its natural state. Due to the large number of ponds and type of development, it is felt that a trunk storm system will never be required in the park. COSTS AND FINANCING The primary purpose of this study is to formulate a master development plan for drainage facilities in Eagan. The estimated costs of the storm sewer system are given in Appendix D• These estimates have been prepared using current con- struction costs. The costs are based on the general location of the storm sewer trunks shown on the layout map (Figure No. 5). 23. :1 "1 7.1 For purposes of estimates, trunk storm sewers were considered to be any line which has a capacity of greater than 25 cfs or was larger than 24 inches in dia- meter. All pipes which serve as connections between ponds or outfall sewers from ponding areas were also considered to be trunk storm sewers. It has been assumed in all cases that the necessary ponding areas Will be dedicated for drainage purposes and therefore land costs are not included in the cost estimates. In most cases, land designated for ponding areas is of marginal quality and this chould be taken into consideration if land acquisition is necessary. The current policy of the Township is to finance storm sewer facilities by special assessments on benefited property on an area basis. All land within a drainage area is considered to be benefited as all land contributes runoff to the storm sewer system. Rates of benefit are progressively higher for single family, multifamily, commercial and industrial land as the rate of runoff increases with the increasing density and greater proportion of impervious developed surface. The cost of a storm sewer system can be divided between trunk costs and lateral costs. The trunk portion.covers the oversizing and, as previously mentioned, is considered to be any line of over 25 cfs capacity or over 24" diameter. The lateral portion includes the catch basins and all smaller lines necessary to serve the developed area. Where a trunk serves as a lateral, part of its cost is considered as trunk benefit. Frequently, large trunk lines must be installed capable of serving a much larger area than that being developed with lateral storm sewer. A portion of the cost is then assessed as a trunk area charge to a portion of the drainage area outside the developed area which will be benefited in the future. In some cases, the future benefit is so far off as to be impractical to be assessed at the time of initial construction and the assessment is deferred with the Township temporarily financing that portion of 24. 1) the construction from the Trunk Storm Sewer Fund established for that purpose. This fund is reimbursed in succeeding years as more area developes and is assessed. By carrying forward the costs, eventually all of the areas will be fairly assessed for their share of the total cost. To carry out such a program, an average trunk storm sewer cost per unit of area is determined for assessment purposes for each type of area based upon the average cost for the trunk system in the major drainage area or the entire Township. These are used for assessments on benefited land each year and are adjusted each succeeding year to reflect current construction costs. As a part of this policy, a strong case can be developed for carrying from 20 to 30% of the total cost from general funds. Some of the reasons are: A. Street rights -of -way owned by the municipality represent 20% to 25% of the area drained. B. Construction of storm sewer in any part of the municipality benefits the entire Township by improving the quality of development. C. An incentive program is provided to encourage proper early storm sewer construction and to encourage the solving of storm sewer problems in built-up areas. In some areas, an average cost per unit of area has been established for the various land uses over the entire municipality. Such an average takes into account the cost sharing by the municipality and the variations in cost between the various drainage districts. Such rates should be evaluated each year to reflect changes in construction costs. 25. L1 u E- SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The proposed basic system layout for storm drainage facilities for Eagan Township is shown on the layout map (Figure No. 5). The following six basic items have been determined for the facilities: 1. Subdivision of the Township into major drainage districts and the major districts into minor watersheds. 2. General routing and sizing of storm sewer trunks. 3. Design flow in various lengths of sewer. 4. Placement and size of storm water lift stations. 5. Designation, type, tributary area, storage capacity, high water level and normal water level of required ponding areas. 6. Estimated costs of constructing the trunk system in each major drainage district. The necessity of incorporating the designated ponding areas into the storm drainage system cannot be over emphasized. These ponds.will provide the storage required to retain the high storm water runoff peaks and provide an economical storm trunk system. The established storage requirements for each pond must be maintained to insure that the computed discharge rates are not exceeded. Pond types and surface areas are not as rigid and may be adjusted in final design. Particular attention during final design should be given to those ponds designated with future outlets to determine if the outlet is necessary. Soil conditions should be carefully investigated to establish that the seepage rate is sufficient to provide an adequate outlet. Based upon the data compiled in this study, it is recommended that: 1. This -report be adopted as a master development plan for a storm drainage system in Eagan Township. 26. 1 2. Ponding areas be established as shown and made a part of the storm drainage system with storage volume tabulated in Appendix C. 3. Adequate storm drainage facilities and retention basins be required during the initial development of all areas. 4. All crossings of Interstate 35E be placed prior to roadway base and paving construction and be considered in conjunction with other utility crossings. 5: An agreement be reached between Eagan Township and each of the bordering municipalities for a fair and equitable cost sharing for storm water disposal problems involving water flowing to or from these municipalities. 6. High water levels governing building limits adjacent to all ponding areas be established by engineering study when the area develops and when final design of a particular ponding facility is required. 7. Consideration be given throughout the storm sewer system to establish and maintain overflow routes to provide relief during extreme storm condi- tions which exceed design capacities. 8. A policy on construction of siltation basins and lake water quality control be established for storm sewer discharges into lakes and ponds. 9. An equitable program for financing storm sewer construction be established which provides that all areas of the Township pay their fair share of the cost of storm water disposal and with a reasonable share of the cost carried by General Funds. 27. APPENDIX A DRAINAGE AREAS Area Area Area Area Area Area Designation (Acres) Designation (Acres) Designation (Acres) A-2a 29 A-20a 80 A-39 75 A-2b 58 A-21 55 A-40 26 A-3a 32 A-21a 58 A-41 35 A-3b 54 A-22a 32 A-42 62 A-4 126 A-22b 31 A-43 85 A-5 84 A-23 26 A-44 62 A-6 39 A-24 11 A-45 39 A-7a 120 A-25a 54 A-46 28 A-7b 57 A-25b 15 A-47 92 A-8 69 A-26 23 A-48 53 A-9 60 A-27 80 A-49 42 A-10 33 A-23 103 A-50 92 A-lIa 27 A-29 41 A-51 32 A-llb 42 A-30 49 A-52 37 A-12 75 A-31 46 A-53 23 A-12a 55 A-31a 53 Total A 4,019 A-13 33 A-32 53 B-1 45 A-13a 31 A-33 82 B-2 127 A-14 62 A-33a 61 B-3 124 A-15 46 A-33b 35 B-4 64 A-16 64 A-34 14 B-5 46 A-17a 64 A-35a 22 B-6 29 A-17b 29 A-35b 66 B-7 41 A-17c 64 A-36 115 B-8 26 A-17d 19 A-37a 73 B-9 39 A-17e 41 A-37b 43 B-10 23 A-13 354 A-38 76 B-11 25 A-19 37 A-38d 53 B-12 33 A-20 51 A-38e 22 B-13 64 A-1 APPENDIX A (CONT'D) DRAINAGE AREAS Area Area Area Area Area Area Designation (Acres) Desi^,nation (Acres) Designation (Acres) B-14 35 C-11 147 D-21 64 B-15 46 C-12 53 D-22 64 B-16 46 C-13 46 D-23 129 B-17 61 C-14 101 D-24 46 B-18 27 C-15 79 D-25 83 B-19 63 Total C 1,205 Total D 1,697 B-20 57 D-1 39 E-I 44 B-21 82 D-2a 34 E-2 45 B-22a 25 D-2b 35 E-3 34 B-22b 28 D-3 87 E-5 55 B-23 46 D-4a 43 E-6a 40 B-24 145 D-4b 37 E-6b 41 B-24a 78 D-5 69 E-7a 66 B-25 23 D-6 48 E-7b 35 B-26 51 D-7 46 E-8 90 B-27 35 D-8 212 E-8a 83 B-28 96 D-9 115 E-9 97 B-29 87 D-10 46 E-10a 46 B-30 32 D-11 14 E-l0b 28 Total B 1,749 D-12a 54 E-l0c 31 C-1 78 D-12b 23 E-lla 69 C-2 101 D-12c 57 E-11b 67 C-3 101 D-13 23 E-12 18 C-4 64 D-14 85 E-13 19 C-5 23 D-15 25 E-14 9 C-6 83 D-16 81 E-15 14 C-7 51 D-17 28 Total E 931 C-8 125 D-13 25 F-3 202 C-9 73 D-19 13 F-4a 54 C-10 80 D-20 74 F-4b 107 A-2 4 ,44 APPENDIX A (CONT'D) DRAINAGE AREAS Area Area Area Area Area Area Designation (Acres) Designation (Acres) Designation (Acres) F-5 152 H-5 137 J-19 41 F-6a 59 H-6 64 J-20 60 F-6b 15 Total H 545 J-21 21 F-7 10 I-1 104 J-22 41 F-8, 48 I-2a 33 J-23 58 F-9 46 I-2b 68 J-24 46 F-10 32 1-3 89 J-25 44 F-11 46 I-4 34 J-26 41 F-12 55 I-5 50 J-27a 70 F-13 54 I-6 59 J-27b 27 Total F 880 Total I 437 J-28 28 G-1 120 J-Z 115 J-29 41 G-2 152 J-3 62 J-30 50 G-3a 50 J-4 78 J-31 120 G-3b 84 J-5 97 J-32 78 G-4 55 J-6 46 J-33 85 G-5 41 J-7 21 J-34 23 G-6 212 J-8 171 3-35 134 G-7 64 J-9 62 J-36 104 G-8 41 J-10 168 J-37a 51 G-9 74 J-11 46 J-37b 18 G-10 92 J-12 34 J-38a 55 G-Ila 151 J-13 81 J-38b 42 G-llb 61 J-14a 36 J-39 92 C-1.2 55 J-14b 46 J-40 46 Total G 1,252 J-14c 22 J-41 18 H-1 69 J-15 28 J-42 35 H-2 51 J-16 62 J-43 28 H-3 166 J-17 69 J-44 80 H-4 58 J-18 60 J-45 53 A- 3 APPENDIX A (CONT'D) DRAINAGE AREAS Area Area Area Area Area Area Designation (Acres) Designation (Acres) Designation (Acres) J-46 55 L-12 74 L-42 71 J-47 35 L-13 161 L-43 83 J-48 55 L-14 48 L-44 170 J-49 173 L-15 88 L-45 28 J-50a 80 L-15a 46 L-46 92 J-5bb 88 L-16 41 L-47 69 J-51 122 L-17 231 L-48 46 J-52 34 L-18 115 L-49 104 J-53 111 L-19 196 L-50 186 J-54 65 L-20 82 L-51 115 J-55 50 L-21 28 L-52 74 J-56 69 L-23 91 L-53 184 J-57 23 L-24 28 L-54 271 J-58 69 L-25 166 L-55 41 Total J 3,963 L-26 134 L-56 138 K-3 78 L-27 97 L-57 60 K-4 78 L-28 28 Total L 4,916 K-5 155 L-29 55 Total K 311 L-30 46 A 4,019 L-1 101 L-31 67 B 1,749 L-2 78 L-32 37 C 1,205 L-3 60 L-33 120 D 1,697 L-4 57 L-34 23 E 931 L-5 32 L-35 32 F 880 L-6 106 L•-36 106 G 1,252 L-7 16 L-37 32 11 545 L-8 51 L-38 129 I 437 L-9 90 L-39 51 J 3,963 L-10 30 L-40 28 K 311 L-11 123 L-41 62 L 4,916 TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA 21,905 A-4 APPENDIX B STORM WATER FLOWS Design Existing Areas Added Tributary Areas (Acres) Capacity Capacity Flow From Flow to (Designation) Unponded Ponded Total (cfs) (cfs) A-dd A -cc 2zA-44 31 --- 31 40 A-ee A -cc A-46 28 28 36 A -cc A-cc-1 1sA-44,A-45 129 --- 129 150 A-cc-1 AP-17 1A-51 145 145 160 A-aa AP-17 A-43a 39 39 50 AP-17 A-bb A-43b 230 230 5 A-bb AP-16 1,A-51 16 230 246 25 A-hh AP-14 A-34 14 14 18 AP-14 AP-15 A-49 56 56 3 AP-20 AP-15 A-47 92 92 3 AP-15 AP-16 A-50 240 240 4 AP-16 A-z A-52 523 523 9 A-z AP-11 A-42 62 523 585 88 AP-11 AP-25 A-36 700 700 10 AP-25 A-w-2 700 700 10 AP-26 A-w-2 A-37b 43 43 1 A-w-2 A-w A-22b 31 743 774 32 AP-28 AP-12 A-29 41 41 4 A-kk AP-13 A-48 53 53 68 AP-13 A-ii A-53 76 76 4 A-jj A-ii A-35a 22 22 28 A-ii AP-12 A-35b 88 76 164 103 AP-12 A-u-3 A-30 254 254 15 A-w-3 AP-22 A-25a 303 308 20 AP-22 A-w-1 A-24,25b 334 334 21 A-w-1 A-w A-23 360 360 21 A-w A-v 31 1,103 1,134 53 AP-7 A-v-1 A-28 108 108 2 A-v-1 A-v A-26 23 108 131 39 A-v A-u-1 54 1,211 1,265 93 B-1 Flow From A-u-1 A-u AP-4 A-u-4 A-u-2 A-oo-1 A-oo-3 A -pp A-oo A-u-3 AP-2 A-uu A-tt AP -la A-vv AP-1 A-r-1 A-r-2 A-qq A-rr A-ss A-q-2 A-q-1 AP-5 A-q A-p-1 AP-27 A-p A-o APPENDIX B (CONT'))) STORM WATER FLOWS Areas Added Tributary Areas (Acres) Flora To (Desi?nation) Unponded Ponded Total A-u A-u-2 A-u-4 A-u-2 A-u-3 A-oo A-oo A-oo A-u-3 AP-2 A-tt A-tt AP-1 AP-1 AP-1 A-q-2 A-r-2 A-q-1 A-rr A-ss A-q-2 A-q-1 A-q A-q A-o AP-27 A-p A-o A-n A-27 A-31 A-32 A-3la A-33 A-33b A-12a A-12a,33a A-13a A-13 A- l lb ';iA-14 A-16 overflow from AP-1 3,A-10 A-7a A-7b A-3 134 1,211 130 1,211 53 53 236 1,264 82 35 55 172 403 1,264 B-2 31 64 31 64 64 17 33 33 60 1,956 170 1,956 30 200 1,986 5,723 5,343 57 5,843 326 7,829 1,788 1,738 Design Existing Capacity Capacity (cfs) (cfs) 1,345 1,391 53 5 53 1,500 82 21 35 49 55 22 172 1,672 1,738 31 25 1,852 42 42 1 31 1,956 64 64 17 15 33 21 33 2,016 2,126 420 30 45 2,186 498 5,723 5,343 30 5,900 121 8,155 686 125 110 5-60 90 65 175 230 250 20 90 123 278 35 150 25 APPENDIX B (CONT'D) STORM WATER FLOWS Design Existing Areas Added Tributary Area (Acres) Capacity Capacity Flow From Flow To (Designation) Unponded Ponded Total (cfs) (cfs) A-L A-k-1 A-38a 28 28 36 KP-3 KP-1 K-3 78 78 z KP-1 A-K-1 K-4 156 156 2 A-K-1 AP-19 A-38b 60 156 216 67 AP-19 A-K A-38c --- 232 232 2 AP-18 A-K A-41 35 35 2 A-K A-j 2ZA-38d 26 267 293 39 A-j A-j-1 ZA-38d 53 267 320 70 A-j-1 A-i A-37a 131 267 398 151 A-i A-i-1 A-38e 153 267 420 172 A-i-1 AP-9 A-40 179 267 446 210 AP-9 A-e A-21 501 501 15 A-g AP-21 A-21a 58 58 93 AP-21 A-e A-20a 138 138 86 A-e A-e-1 639 639 101 A-e-1 AP-8 A-20 51 639 690 183 AP-8 A-c A-19 727 727 110 A-c AP-6 A-17c 64 727 791 232 AP-6 A-c-1 A-17d 810 810 150 A-c-1 A-c-2 A-17b 29 810 839 206 A-c-2 A -a A-3a 61 810 871 270 A-b-3 A-b-2 A-17a 64 64 123 A-b-2 A-b-1 A-17e 105 105 189 A-b-1 A-b A-2a 134 134 233 B-g B-g-1 - 209 209 1 B-g-1 BP-7 B-27 35 209 244 45 B-f B-f-1 B-26 51 - 51 65 B-f-1 BP-7 B-25 74 74 89 B-3 I APPENDIX B (CONT'D) STORM WATER FLOWS Design Existing Areas Added Tributary Areas (Acres) Capacity Capacity Flow From Flow To (Designation) Unponded Ponded Total (cfs) (cfs) B-h B-h-1 B-28,29 183 183 175 B-h-1 BP-7 B-30 215 215 210 BP-8 BP-7 B-24a 78 78 -2 BP-7 B-j-1 B-24 784 784 4 B-j - B-j-1 B-22a 25 25 32 B-j-1 B-e-2 B-23 71 784 855 89 BP-9 B-b-3 B-19 63 63 4 B-10 B-e-3 B-21 82 82 12 B-e-3 BP-6 145 145 16 BP-6 B-e B-20 202 202 1 B-e B-e-1 202 202 1 B-e-1 B-e-2 B-17 61 202 283 79 B-e-2 BP-5 B-16 178 986 1,164 205 B-k BP-5 B-18 27 27 35 BP-5 BP-4 B-15 1,237 1,237 2 B-m BP-4 B-13a 13 18 23 BP-4 B-d B-13 1,301 1,301 8 B-d B-c B-14 35 1,301 1,336 53 B-c B-b B-4 99 1,301 1,400 118 B-n-2 B-n-1 B-12a 16 --- 16 31 B-n B-n-1 B-lla 7 7 8 B-n-1 B-p B-11b,12b 58 58 76 B-p BP-3 B-9 97 97 111 B-o BP-3 B-10 23 23 29 BP-3 B-b-1 B-8 146 35 B-b-1 B-b B-6 29 146 175 72 B-b BP-2 13-5 174 1,447 1,621 228 B-a BP-2 B-7 41 41 52 BP-2 BP-1 - 1,958 1,953 23 BP-1 A-p-1 _ 5,723 5,723 23 B-4 APPENDIX B (CONT'D) STORM WATER FLOWS Design Existing Areas Added Tributary Areas (Acres) .Capacity Capacity Flow From Flow To (Designation) Unnonded Ponded Total (cfs) (cfs) CP-5 CP-4 C-10 80 80 CP-4 C-j-1 C-11 227 227 3 C-j-1 CP-3 227 227 3 C••�, C-j C-9a 27 27 43 C-j CP-3 C-9b 73 73 106 CP-3 C-h-1 C-13 346 346 C-h-1 C-h C-14a 50 346 396 85 C-h-2 C-h C-12 53 53 C-h C-g C-14b 154 34� 500 236 CP-1 CP-2 C-8 125 125 CP-2 C-e-2 C-7b 143 143 11. C-e-2 C-d C-7a 33 143 176 44 CP-6 C-d C-6 83 83 2 C-d C-d-1 C-5 56 226 282 69 C-d-1 C-c-1 C-4a 102 226 328 118 C-c C-c-1 C-2a 39 39 75 C-c-1 C-a C-2b, 4b 221 226 447 305 C-a C-a-1 221 226 447 C-a-1 C-a-2 221 226 447 305 DP-7 D-t D-25 83 83 1 D-y D-t D-24 46 46 73 D-z D-t D-23a 39 39 37 D-t DP-10 85 83 168 108 DP-10 D-s D-23b - 258 258 25 DP-11 D-s D-14 85 85 21 D-s DP-5 343 343 46 DP-6 DP-5 D-16 81 81 1 D-s-1 DP-5 D-22a 32 32 41 B-5 10 30 52 2 350 �aJ 73 r"" APPENDIX B (CONT'D) STORM WATER FLOWS Design Existing Areas Added Tributary Areas (Acres) Capacity Capacity Flow From Flow To (Designation) Unponded Ponded Total (cfs) (cfs) DP-5 D-o D-22b 488 483 8 D-r D-q D-21a 41 41 66 D-q DP-4 D-21b 64 64 96 D-p DP-4 D-18 25 25 40 DP-4 . D-o D-20 163 163 2 D-o D-m 651 651 10 DP-12 D-w-1 D-12a - 54 54 1 D-w-1 DP-3 D-12b 23 54 77 45 DP-13 D-w D-15 25 25 1 D-w DP-3 D-13 28 25 '53 40 DP-3 D-L D-12c 187 187 4 D-m D-k 838 838 12 D-L D-k D-11 14 187 187 31 D-k DP-2 D-17 42 838 880 69 D-j DP-2 D-9 115 115 78 D-i DP-2 D-19 16 16 18 DP-2 D-e D-8 1,223 1,223 12 DP -la D-e D-7 46 46 1 D-e D-c 1,269 1,269 13 DP-1 D-c D-6 --- 48 48 D-c D-c-1 1,317 1,317 14 D-c-1 D-b D-2b 35 1,317 1,352 75 D-b D-b-1 D-2a 69 1,317 1,386 75 D-b-1 D-a 69 1,317 1,386 97 D-h D-,g, D-10 46 - 46 59 D-g D-g-1 D-5 115 115 123 D-g-1 D-f D-4a 158 158 175 B-6 1 1- i Li APPENDIX B (CONT'D) STORM WATER FLOW Design Existing Areas Added Tributary Areas (Acres) Capacity Capacity Flow From Flow To (Designation) Unponded Ponded Total (cfs) (cfs) E-k-2 E-k E-14,15 23 23 29 E-k-1 E-k E-13 19 19 24 E-k E-k-3 42 42 50 E-k-3 E-e-1 E-12 60 60 70 E-e-1 E-e-2 E-l0b 88 88 105 E-e E-e-2 E-l0a 46 46 34 E-e-2 E-d 134 134 115 E-c E-d 1E-11b 34 - 34 64 E-d E-f ',,:E-11b,E-10c 232 232 200 E-f EP-2 E-lla 301 --- 301 200 E-h E-hE-2 45 --- 45 22 E-h-1 E-g E-1 89 89 75 E-m E-g E-8a 83 83 65 E-g E-i E-3 206 117 140 E-j E-i 2.E-5 27 27 20 E-i EP-1 E-87E-5 351 --- 451 260 E-L EP-1 E-7b 35 35 32 E-a E-b E-7a 33 33 67 E-b-1 E-b GP-1 1,252 1,252 30 E-b EP-2 ',;E-7a 66 1,252 1,318 157 EP-1 F-a 2,183 2,183 10 F-a F-b F-13 54 2,133 2,237 104 F-b FP-1 F-4a,12 163 2,183 2,346., 267 F-g FP-5 --- 437 437 10 FP-5 F-j F-9 483 483 10 F-i FP-3 F-6b 15 15 25 FP-3 F-j F-7 25 25 -':: F-j F-e 508 508 11 F-c FP-6 F-10 32 32 61 B-7 APPENDIX B (CONT'D) STORM WATER FLOW Design Existing Areas Added Tributary Areas (Acres) Capacity Capacity Flow From Flow To (Designation) Unponded Ponded Total (cfs) (cfs) FP-6 F-e F-11 78 78 2 F-e F-h F-8 48 586 634 104 F-h FP-1 634 104 FP-2 FP-1 F-3,4 309 309 5 FP-1 H-d F-2,6a 3,500 3,500 50 GP-4 G-a G-12 55 55 1 G-a G-b G-11a 151 55 206 291 G-b GP-5 G-11b 212 55 267 383 GP-6 GP-5 G-10 92 92 2 GP-5 G-e G-9 433 433 50 G-f G-e G-5 41 41 66 G-e GP-1 - 41 433 474 116 GP-8 GP-1 G-3b,4 139 139 25 GP-7 G-k G-3 41 41 1 G-L G-k G-la 92 92 177 G-k GP-3 G-lb 120 41 161 231 GP-3 GP-2 G 363 363 .20 GP-2 GP-1 G-7,3a 427 427 20 GP-1 E-b-1 G-6 1,252 1,252 30 H-e 11-f H-d H-c H-b H-b-1 H-d H-4 58 58 55 H-d H-5 137 --- 137 60 H-c 195 3,500 3,695 140 H 11-3 361 3,500 3,861 250 1-1-b-1. 361 3,500 3,861 540 H-a 11-1,2 431 3,500 3,981 610 13-3 APPENDIX B (CONT'D) STORM WATER FLOW Design Existing Areas Added Tributary Areas (Acres) Capacity Capacity Flow From Flow To (Designation) Unponded Ponded Total (cfs) (cfs) I-b I -a ZI-5 25 25 48 I -a IP-2,3 `J-5 50 50 84 IP-4 IP-1 I-6 59 59 2 IP-1 I-c I-3,4 182 182 10 I-c IP-2,3 I-2a 33 182 215 73 J-a JP-23 J-45 53 53 68 JP-23 JP-24 J-46 108 108 2 JP-24 JP-25 J-47 - 143 143 3 JP-25 JP-26 J-48 198 198 14 J-b JP-26 J-49 173 173 221 J-c J-c-1 J-50a 80 80 102 J-c-1 JP-26 --- 80 80 102 JP-26 JP-22 J•5,c: 539 539 6 J-d JP-22 J-43 28 28 36 JP-22 JP-21 J-44 647 647 6 JP-27 JP-28 J-58 69 69 1 JP-23 J-g J-57 92 92 1 J-g J-h J-56 69 92 161 89 J-h J-i J-53 180 92 272 210 J-i JP-21 J-52 214 92 306 236 J-f J-f-1 J-51a 75 75 96 J-f-1 JP-21 J-51b 122 122 146 J-e J-e-1 J-42 35 35 45 J-e-1 JP-21 J-41 53 53 64 JP-21 JP-20 J-40 1,174 1,174 10 JP-20 JP-19 J-39 1,266 1,266 10 JP-18 JP-17 J-20 60 60 JP-17 JP-16 J-19 101 101 1 JP-16 JP-33 J-18 161 161 10 B-9 APPENDIX B (CONT'D) STORM WATER FLOWS Design Existing Areas Added Tributary Areas (Acres) Capacity Capacity Flow From Flow To (Designation) Unponded Ponded Total (cfs) (cfs) JP-15 JP-14 J-17 69 69 4 JP-13 JP-14 J-15 28 28 1 JP-14 JP-33 ZJ-16 128 128 1 JP-33 JP-12 '�J-16 320 320 5 JP-12 • J-L-2 J-24 366 366 3 J-L-2 J-L-1 --- 366 366 3 J-j J-k J-22 41 --- 41 52 J-k J-L J-21 62 62 84 J-L J-L-1 J-23,25 164 164 212 J-L-1 JP-19 164 366 530 215 JP-19 J-n J-26 --- 1,837 1,837 16 JP-32 J-m J-13 81 81 1 JP-31 J-m J-14b 46 46 1 J-m J-n J-14a 36 127 163 48 J-n J-o J-14c 58 1,964 2,022 92 JP-30 J-o J-27b 70 70 3 J-o J-p 58 2,034 2,092 87 J-p J-q J-27a 85 2,034 2,119 123 J-r J-q J-84 23 23 29 J-q J-q-1 108 2,034 2,142 141 J-q-1 JP-11 J-28 136 2,034 2,170 160 J-t JP-29 J-54 65 65 83 JP-29 J-v J-55 115 115 1 J-u J-v J-38a 55 55 70 J-v J-v-1 J-38b 97 115 212 110 J-v-1 J-v-2 J-37a 148 115 262 164 J-v-2 JP-9 J-37b 166 115 281 130 J-w JP-7 J-33a 50 50 64 JP-7 JP-8 J-33b 85 85 1. JP-3 JP-9 J-35 219 219 1 B-10 Flow From APPENDIX B (CONT'D) STORM WATER FLOWS Design Existing Areas Added Tributary Areas (Acres) Capacity Capacity Flow To (Designation) Unponded Ponded Total (cfs) (cfs) JP-9 JP-10 J-36 JP-6 JP-10 J-31 JP-10 JP-11 J-29,30 J-x J-x-1 J-12 J-x-1 JP-11 J-11 J-y JP-11 J-9 ". JP-11 J-aa J-10 J-z J-z-1 J-6 J-z-1 J-aa J-5 J-aa JP-4 --- JP-3 JP-4 J-4 JP-4 JP-5 J-8 JP-5 BP-2 J-32 BP-1,2 A-p-1 --- A-P-1 A.P-27 L L 604 604 2 120 120 1 815 815 4 34 34 44 80 80 106 62 62 79 3,295 3,295 22 46 46 88 143 --- 143 143 3,295 3,438 78 78 1 3,687 3,687 24 3,765 3,765 24 5,723 5,723 28 5,723 5,723 JP-2 JP-1 J-3,7 83 83 1 JP-1 J-2 198 198 L-a L-a-1 L-la 47 --- 47 60 L-a-1 LP-1 L-lb 101 101 89 LP-1 L-10 131 131 LP-3 L-o L-2 78 78 1 L-o LP-4 78 78 1 LP-4 L-3 138 138 L-c LP-5 L-12a 23 23 29 LP-5 L-12b, 8 125 125 L-b L-d L-4 57 - 57 73 L-d LP-6 L-5,7 103 103 122 LP-6 B-g L-6 209 209 1 B-11 100 105 25 1 APPENDIX B (CONT'D) STORM WATER FLOWS Design Existing Areas Added Tributary Areas (Acres) Capacity Capacity Flow From Flow To (Designation) Unponded Ponded Total (cfs) (cfs) LP-7 L-g L-13 161 161 2 L-f L-g -':L-16 21 21 27 L-g LP-12 '21,-16 41 161 202 51 LP-12 L-14,15,15a,17 615 615 LP-23 . L-h L-50 186 186 2 L-h L-i L-48,49 150 186 336 170 L-i LP-24 L-47 219 166 405 234 LP-24 LP-45 L-57 --- 465 465 10 LP-25 LP-45 L-55 - 41 41 6 LP-45 L-j L-46,40 626 626 5 LP-33 LP-34 L-45 28 28 1 LP-34 L-j L-43 111 111 7 L-j LP-35 737 737 12 LP-35 LP-36 --- 737 737 8 LP-36 LP-37 L-41 799 799 5 LP-40 L-L L-23 28 28 1 L-L LP-37 L-29 55 28 83 71 LP-37 LP-38 L-30 928 928 8 LP-39 L-k L-23 91 91 25 L-k LP-33 L-31 67 91 158 105 LP-38 L-19 LP-30 LP-31 L-54 271 271 1 LP-29 LP-28 1 L-m LP-41 L-21 23 23 36 L-p LP-41 L-24 28 28 36 LP-41 L-20 138 138 8-12 1 t.1 3 APPENDIX C POND DATA Pond Storage Tributary Pond Area Pond Area High Normal 0ut- Desig- Pond Volume Area @ HWL @ NWL :Water Water Flow nation Type(cu.ft.x106) (Acres) (Acres) (Acres) Level Level (cfs) AP-1,1a A 1.20 1,956 11.12 6.26 800.6 797.3 235 AP-2 C 1.93 1,788 8.35 2.47 866.0 856.6 250 AP-3 A 1.03 269 3.69 2.42 860.0 852.3 50 AP-4 A .37 53 2.86 1.72 890.0 886.3 5 AP-5 A .05 30 1.03 .31 818.0 816.5 45 AP-6 A .39 810 1.74 .23 804.0 794.8 150 AP-7 A 1.07 108 5.81 .51 893.0 885.8 2 AP-8 C .53 727 3.47 .55 876.0 869.0 110 AP-9 A 1.65 501 8.09 5.10 898.0 892.3 15 AP-10 A .76 75 5.26 3.13 924.0 919.7 2 AP-11 A 2.05 700 15.80 11.84 892.4 889.2 10 AP-12 A 1.06 254 5.46 .55 894.0 885.3 15 13 AP-13 A .42 76 4.80 3.49 926.0 923.7 4 AP-14 C .33 56 1.40 .33 921.0 913.0 2 AP-15 D 1.34 240 3.50 .63 910.0 894.2 4 AP-16 A .73 523 4.60 1.42 926.0 919.8 7 AP-17 A 1.73 230 6.78 2.15 938.0 930.0 3 AP-13 A .16 35 2.20 1.35 928.0 925.3 2 AP-19 A .43 232 3.20 .27 924.5 915.0 4 AP-20 C .56 92 5.74 .05 935.0 929.7 3 AP-21 C .46 138 4.20 2.68 896.0 893.0 86 AP-22 A .39 334 2.48 .98 878.0 873.0 20 AP-23 A .35 46 2.20 1.10 894.0 889.3 5 AP-24 A .23 26 2.74 .41 875.0 871.7 1 AP-25 A 0 700 .40 .40 880.5 830.5 10 11 AP-26 A .28 43 1.45 .71 884.4 878.5 1 AP-27 A .40 120 1.40 .74 301.0 796.3 30 AP-28 A .13 41 1.00 .35 916 909.7 4 L C-1 APPENDIX C (CONT'D) POND DATA Pond Storage Tributary Pond Area Pond Area High Normal 0ut- Desig-. Pond Volume Area @ HWL @ NWL Water Water Flow nation Type (cu.ft.x106) (Acres) (Acres) (Acres) Level Level (cfs) BP-1,2 (B)P 10.69 5,723 53.85 33.95 796.0 790.3 23 BP-3 C .50 146 1.50 893.0 881.3 35 BP-4,5 A 2.96 1,301 13.64 6.54 878.0 869.7 8 BP-6 B 2.05 202 3.52 905.0 880.3 1 BP-7 A 5.49 784 42.98 34.74 905.0 901.8 4 BP-3 A .95 78 10.45 8.49 906.0 903.7 0.5 BP-9 A .60 63 4.36 2.18 912.0 908.0 4 BP-10 A .16 32 1.61 .90 920.0 912.0 12 CP-1 A 1.04 125 9.85 1.37 828.0 822.3 1 CP-2 A .10 18 1.60 .87 820.5 818.3 0.5 CP-3 C 1.20 346 5.55 --- 850.0 840.0 5 CP-4 B 2.00 227 8.08 .34 840.0 827.7 3 CP-5 A .60 80 4.46 2.66 876.0 871.7 3 CP-6 C .72 83 3.82 798.5 790.7 2 DP-1 B .69 48 3.41 .39 866.0 859.3 0.5 DP-1A A .44 46 4.36 3.35 880.5 878.0 0.5 DP-2 A 10.10 1,223 41.32 33.67 880.0 874.0 12 DP-3 B 1.15 187 4.20 .74 870.0 857.7 4 DP-4 D 1.50 163 9.32 874.0 865.7 2 DP-5 D 2.60 488 6.58 1.06 856.0 838.3 8 DP-6 A .63 81 3.79 2.30 863.0 857.3 1 DP-7 A .88 83 16.06 13.70 881.6 880.3 1 DP-10 C .70 276 1.84 .49 860.0 848.0 25 DP-11 C .65 85 5.23 1.93 860.0 855.7 1 DP-12 C .63 54 6.66 4.43 869.5 867.0 1 DP-13 A .29 25 2.39 1.51 880.0 876.7 1 EP-1,2 B 37.20 2,133 36.11 8.35 850.9 816.7 10 C-2 1 1� APPENDIX C (CONT'D) POND DATA Pond Storage Tributary Pond Area Pond Area High Normal Out Desig- Pond Volume Area @HWL @ NUL Water Water Flow nation Type (cu.ft.x106) (Acres) (Acres) (Acres) Level Level (cfs) FP-1 B 3.43 3,500 10.10 .48 838.0 823.7 50 FP-2 A .99 309 5.11 .23 845.0 837.0 5 FP-3 (A)P .28 25 2.41 1.52 892.0 888.3 0.5 FP-5 A 1.30 483 8.80 6.03 865.0 861.0 10 FP-6 B .84 78 5.46 2.36 843.5 839.0 2 GP-1 B 7.56 1,252 25.30 1.38 817.0 800.3 30 GP-2,3 B 3.18 427 11.12 2.91 815.5 804.3 20 GP-4 C .62 55 3.43 1.33 879.0 874.0 1 GP-5 C 1.73 433 9.24 1.62 851.0 843.3 50 GP-6 C 1.02 92 3.79 .60 876.0 866.0 2 GP-7 C .33 41 2.89 840.0 834.7 1 GP-8 C .65 139 2.50 1.00 867.5 860.0 25 IP-1 A 1.25 182 12.49 10.36 878.0 875.6 6 IP-2,3 B 2.91 437 19.31 5.07 862.0 854.6 10 IP-4 A .51 59 6.43 882.0 880.0 2 JP-1 (B)P 3.32 198 10.59 2.03 806.0 795.0 0.5 JP-2 A .84 83 4.30 1.44 850.0 843.7 1 JP-3 A .59 78 8.06 3.44 839.0 836.3 1 JP-4 A 4.20 3,687 26.99 14.14 840.0 835.7 24 JP-5 A 1.33 3,765 6.16 1.71 832.0 825.0 24 JP-6 B 1.12 120 6.55 2.22 818.0 812.3 1 JP-7 A .76 85 8.26 6.42 862.0 859.4 0.5 JP-8 A 1.46 219 8.70 1.42 820.5 818.0 1 JP-9 B 4.70 6'.i,, 17.C4 9.27 824.0 817.0 2 JP-10 A 1.80 815 5.79 2.50 830.0 320.3 4 JP-11 B 7.40 3,295 19.48 5.99 828.0 815.7 22 JP-12 D 1.73 366 4.23 1.45 840.0 825.5 3 C-3 APPENDIX C (CONT'D) POND DATA Pond Storage Tributary Pond Area Pond Area High Normal 0ut- Desig- Pond Volume Area @ HWL @ NUL Water Water Flow nation Type (cu.ft.x106) (Acres) (Acres) (Acres) Level Level (cfs) JP-13 B .21 28 1.59 --- 870.0 863.3 1 JP-14 B 1.40 128 2.70 .36 848.0 825.2 1 JP-15 B .46 69 3.10 870.0 857.2 4 JP-16 A .40 161 2.98 1.64 878.0 874.7 10 JP-17 D .60 101 3.12 868.0 852.7 1 JP-18 A .77 60 4.53 .43 866.0 859.3 0.5 JP-19 A 1.5 1,837 5.13 3.58 878.0 870.2 16 JP-20 B 1.50 1,266 11.96 10.38 855.2 852.0 10 JP-21 D 4.31 1,174 7.28 .46 840.0 815.3 10 JP-22 C 2.57 647 5.36 .79 840.0 820.7 6 JP-23 A .76 103 6.46 4.74 855.3 852.2 2 JP-24 A .24 143 3.59 2.29 845.0 843.3 3 JP-25 A .20 193 2.76 1.13 319.3 817.0 14 JP-26 D 2.14 539 13.20 818.0 804.3 6 JP-27 A .51 69 4.95 .07 969.0 960.2 1 JP-28 A .43 92 2.65 .15 965.5 956.0 1 JP-29 A .94 115 3.21 .46 938.0 925.3 1 JP-30 A .40 70 _1.49 .47 882.0 872.7 3 JP-31 A .31 46 2.43 1.53 880.0 876.3 1 JP-32 A .62 81 3.75 2.43 890.4 885.7 1 JP-33 A .81 320 1.93 .23 850.0 830.3 5 LP-1 (B)P 1.71 131 8.09 4.30 910.0 904.1 - LP-2 (A)P 1.88 90 12.55 8.54 915.0 911.0 LP-3 B .51 78 3.43 2.19 391.0 886.2 1 LP-4 (A)P 2.47 133 11.77 6.40 919.0 909.3 LP-5 (A)P 1.94 125 7.72 1.17 928.0 916.1 - LP-6 B 2.13 209 8.31 904.0 892.1 1 LP-7 B .98 161 5.30 .26 936.0 918.8 2 C-4 11 APPENDIX C (CONT'D) POND DATA Pond Storage Tributary Pond Area Pond Area High Normal Out - Des ig- Pond Volume Area @ H.JL @ NUL Water Water Flow nation Type (cu.ft.x106) (Acres) (Acres) (Acres) Level Level (cfs) LP-8 B(P) 1.20 123 952.2 949.0 LP-9 A 2.04 48 964.0 958.0 LP-10 A 38 964.0 958.0 LP-11 A 1.0 46 LP-12 (A)P 6.69 615 58.36 52.43 924.0 921.2 LP-13 (.X)P .86 37 13.15 11.40 922.0 920.4 12-14 (A)13 .42 32 5.76 4.85 922.0 920.2 LP-15 (A)P .72 23 6.14 4.03 916.0 913.7 LP-16 (A)P 1.60 106 9.20 932.0 928.3 --- LP-17 (A)P .64 32 3.70 931.0 928.7 LP-18 (A)P 5.07 120 41.42 37.64 911.5 908.6 LP-19 (A)P 1.40 129 11.43 10.24 903.0 900.2 LP-20 (A)P .95 115 11.50 5.97 917.3 914.2 --- LP-21 (A)P .79 51 13.77 10.39 904.0 902.5 LP-22 (A)P .30 10 1.71 .38 940.0 935.5 LP-23 C 1.55 186 14.21 12.01 928.0 925.3 2 LP-24 A 1.70 465 14.57 12.54 886.0 883.2 10 LP-25 A .18 41 3.34 2.93 926.0 924.7 6 LP-26 (A)P 2.:'O 74 14.39 11.97 924.0 920.2 LP-27 (A)P 1.62 115 6.58 2.07 928.0 920.2 LP-28 (A)P 2.70 184 11.69 9.50 916.0 910.7 LP-29 A 1.42 .44 916.0 911.0 1 LP-30 A 2.80 271 916.0 903.3 1 LP-31 (A)P 4.31 409 24.23 12.23 908.0 903.0 12-32 (B)P 2.904 170 11.55 8.20 879.0 872.3 LP-33 A .20 23 3.31 2.36 888.0 886.2 1 LP-34 A .41 111 2.21 1.25 884.0 878.3 7 12-35 B 2.95 799 8.66 2.32 877.0 862.7 5 LP-36 B 2.95 799 3.66 2.32 377.0 860.2 5 C-5 APPENDIX C (CONT'D) POND DATA Pond Storage Tributary Pond Area Pond Area High Normal 0ut- Desig- Pond Volume Area @ H L @ NWL Water Water Flow nation Type (cu.ft.x106) (Acres) (Acres) (Acres) Level Level (cfs) LP-37 A .68 928 4.61 3.12 882.0 878.3 8 LP-38 (B)P 18.90 1,282 44.56 33.62 872.0 861.3 LP-39 A .30 91 4.25 2.66 898.0 895.99 25 LP-40 A .17 23 1.67 .70 900.0 896.8 1 LP-41 (A)P 2.15 138 10.37 3.05 888.0 878.8 LP-42 (B)P 2.59 166 11.30 9.39 840.0 834.0 LP-43 (A)P 2.26 134 19.19 11.73 852.0 848.8 LP-44 (A)P 1.45 97 6.56 3.02 852.0 844.9 LP-45 A 3.71 626 26.10 16.77 882.2 878.3 5 LP-46 (A)P 1.74 71 9.25 6.55 884.0 879.2 KP-1 (B)P 1.47 156 7.06 3.47 940.0 933.7 0.5 KP-2 (B)P 3.18 155 10.35 5.76 1,002.0 993.3 KP-3 (D)P .63 78 6.00 2.06 933.0 928.4 0.5 C-6 1 i i 44444 4 APPENDIX D STORM DRAINAGE COSTS Proposed Lift Sta. Engineer. Existing Proposed & & Assessable Cost Per Dist.' Facilities Trunks Force Mains Contingen. Total Area Sq. ft. A 618,000 2,350,000 57,000 361,000 3,386,000 2,750 $ .0283 B 1,021,000 79,000 166,000 1,266,000 1,312 $ .0222 C 75,000 443,000 38,000 72,000 628,000 904 $ .0159 D-220,000 617,000 223,000 126,000 1,186,000 1,273 $ .0214 E 460,000 208,000 123,000 50,000 841,000 698 $ .0277 F 217,000 217,000 65,000 499,000 464 $ .0247 G 380,000 375,000 113,000 866,000 939 $ .0212 H 2O0,000 189,000 28,000 417,000 408 $ .0234 I 117,000 128,000 37,000 282,000 328 $ .0197 J 45,000 1,680,000 580,000 339,000 2,644,000 2,972 $ .0204 K 233 L 24,000 721,000 175,000 134,000 1,054,000 2,612 $ .0093 Tot.. 1,642,000 7,943,000 1,995,000 1,491,000 13,071,000 14,893 $ .0201 D-1 I: APPENDIX E LIFT STATION DETAIL Static Total Forcemain Forcemain Lift Station Pumped Pumped Pump Size Head Head Size Length Number From To (GPM) (feet) (feet) (inches) (feet) 1 AP-15 AP-16 1,800 33 41 12 1,040 2 BP-6 3-e 450 28 42 6 820 3 BP-1 A-p-1 12,600 65 76 24 1,090 4 CP-4 C-j-1 1,350 34 39 12 1,000 5 DP-3 D-L 1,800 45 57 12 1,700 6 DP-4 D-0 900 30 37 '8 480 7 DP-5 D-0 4,500 62 83 18 3,660 8 EP-1 F-a 4,500 47 71 18 4,300 9 FP-1 H-d 22,000 73 97 36 6,000 10 GP-2 GP-1 9,000 12 28 20 1,270 11 GP-1 E-b 13,500 80 99 24 1,700 12 IP-2,3 FP-5 4,500 20 25 16 460 13 JP-26 JP-22 2,700 45 55 16 2,130 14 JP-21 JP-20 4,500 54 67 16 1,280 15 JP-20 JP-19 4,500 20 24 16 430 16 JP-17 JP-16 450 25 34 6 450 17 JP-12 J-L-2 2,250 71 87 12 1,300 18 JP-6 JP-10 900 14 19 8 350 19 JP-9 JP-10 1,350 24 31 12 1,570 20 JP-11 J-aa 9,900 36 61 20 1,650 21 LP-36 LP-37 2,250 18 26 12 620 22 LP-3 L-0 450 43 55 6 650 23 LP-6 B-g 450 40 50 6 550 24 LP-7 L-g 900 70 87 8 1,130 25 FP-6 F-e 900 29 43 8 900 26 DP-1 D-c 225 20 21 6 300 E-1 FIGURE NO. 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 CC 3 0 RAINFALL INTENSITY- INCHES PER 2 I0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 03 0.2 0.1 STORM FREOUE'JC CURVET 100 5 4 5 10 20 30 40 50 1 5 10 MINUTES HOURS TIME OF CONCENTRATION IN MINUTES RAINFALL CHART FIGURE NO. 1000, 000 9 50, 000 900,000 850,000 800,000 7 50, 000 700,000 w 650,000 u 600,000 550,000 500,000 450,000 400,000 0 350,000 I ' 300,000 i PER. 100 ACF 250,000 200,000 150,000 100,000 50,000 0 POND MASS FLOW DIAGRAM 1 � ' ! 100'. 1 1 Tributary lccres 100 Yr Frequeicy C = 0.4 Inflcrr from 100 r. stor 0, •I0 cu.ft. Required >rce 1 11 it I I 1 1 II 11 11 11_J 11 3 6 9 12 15 18 DURATION — HOURS 21 24 27 30 • FIGURE NO.3 POND TYPES HIGH WATER LEVEL OUTLET CONTROL 01, n\ = t = =l1 TYPE A =irk NORMAL WATER LEVEL PERMANENT POND WITH STORAGE OBTAINED FROM WATER LEVEL VARIANCE. GRAVITY CONTROLLED OUTLET: HIGH WATER tea, LE`1EL TYPE B LIFT STATION NORMAL WATER LEVEL PERMANENT POND WITH STORAGE OBTAINED FROM WATER LEVEL VARIANCE. PUMP CONTROLLED OUTLET, HIGH WATER LEVEL TYPE C OUTLET CONTRO HIGH WATER LEVEL TYPE D LIFT STATION TEMPORARY PONDING WITH GRAVITY CONTROLLED OUTLET. pnND NORMALLY DRY. TEMPORARY PONDING WITH PUMP CONTROLLED OUTLET. POND NORMALLY DRY WITH OUTLET TO PROVIDE COMPLETE DRAINAGE. PERMANENT POND WITH WATER LOSS PROVIDED THROUGH SEEPAGE AND EVAPORATION. * POND TYPE AND PROJECTED OUTLET. TYPE (*)P 1 ti • , fr.:v:.. 4AP-10 I31ti 2P-3 DRIER • T(ST ,1 KP-2 t APPLE\ -j VALLEY LEGEND 'Rt POSEL AND EXISTING STORM SEhER FOP LIFT STATION AND FCRCE MAIN ROJECTED OUTLETS FOR SEEPAGE P:.N(,S ROJECTED LIFT STATIONS ANC FORCE MAIN IAJOR DIVIDES •ONDING AREAS EEPAGE PONDS r— < Qy- -.--.1-1-4 1 ) • 0 -. r ♦ -. ♦ -. LP-38 KP-1 141 LP-9 CPO L P-8e" 1' (AMC) TA COUNTY PARK L KUlA 1 COi iF7F Y PARK p LP-10 LP -II I \I" iROS LP-38 POSSIBLE OUTLETS FOR SEEPAGE PONDS EAGAN TOWNSH IP FIGURE 4 4 1 KAM LP-32 5 P-28 1 o I _- OD7 .." 300 i t 0 I/2 MILE NORTH 'MILE BONESTROC, ROSENE, ANDERLIK B ASSOCIATES CONSULTING ENGINEERS ST. PAUL, MINNES(,TA