Agenda - Council - 04/27/1982 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I I I I I I I I I I I I. i I I I Page - 2 - The Board's choice of a site remains with alternative #4. Our reasons are as follows: l) It is the least developed and would cause less impact on ex- isting development and facJ_lities (Anoka High School and Landscape Learn- ing Center). This we feel is an extremely important point in relation to project cost and soil erosion factors. 2) Shorter bridge 'span across river which would create a probable cost savings. 3) In relation to shorter bridge span, the occurrence of unavoidable erosion and sedimentation to the river might be appreciably less. 4) With alternative ~&, there w~]l be little or no impact on ex- isting weltnads. 5) Connection with Jct. of CSAH #5 and STH #47 is a good location for traffic to diffuse to points north and west. 6) Land use plans can be more readily adapted to the new road and bridge due to virtual lack of existing development and facilities at present. The opposite would be.necessary if other alternatives are used. The environmental assessment 'indicates proposing alternative #3. We feel' the adverse impact is greater with alternative #3 than with alternative #&. Some reasons are: 1) More flood plain and river encroachment with #3 requiring longer bridge spans. 2) The close proximity to the school and its facilities will be'a disturbingdistraction despite the roadway being constructed 6 feet below grade. .. 3) Although #& bisects the open space area, this factor would not limit the comprehensive use of this area. Both areas of the open space would be large enough to be functional. Access across the highway would be by pedestrian bridge as in#3. 4) Alternatiye#3 will impact wetlands even if not types 3, 4 or 5. Alternative #4 need not impact the wetland mentioned in the report. Our office strongly suggests that after site selection takes place that supreme efforts be made to keep soil erosion and sedimentation at an absolute minimum. In the Environmental Assessment prepared by Consulting Engineers Diversified, Inc. our Board suggests following conservation measures outlined on page ?0 to avoid all unnecessary soil erosion, sedi- mentation and to maintain water quality. We appreciate the opportunity to co¢~ent on this proposal.