HomeMy WebLinkAboutFYI - Field Street - Letter from MN DotDO~~p1NESpT,9yp Minnesota Department of Transportation
9 F Transportation Building
~ 0 395 John Ireland Boulevard
~~roFraA`'y~ Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155-1899
November 3, 2008
Mr. Dennis Gimmestad
Government Programs & Compliance Officer
State Historic Preservation Office
Minnesota Historical Society,
345 Kellogg Blvd. W.
St. Paul, MN 55101
- ~~i.,~ ~~>~
f~~~ 10 208
_:, ~ ~ , ~USEPH
RE: S.P. 233-108-01 (East-West Collector Roadway, Field Street Corridor, St. Joseph, Stearns County)
T 124N, R 29W, S 9, 14, 15, 16
SHPO Number 2006-0826
We have reviewed the above-referenced undertaking pursuant to our FHWA-delegated responsibilities for
compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended (36 CFR 800), and as
per the terms of the Programmatic Agreement (PA) between the FHWA and the Minnesota State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO) (June 2005). We previously wrote to your office on April 17, 2007 with a
determination of eligibility for the resources within the area of potential effect (APE) for the project, and
your office wrote back May 22', 2007 and concurred with our determinations. As you know, the original
proposal called for Field Street to run through the middle of the College of St. Benedict's property in the
fields located between the woods and the campus proper. Because this would have been a major adverse
effect to the Sisters of the Order of Saint Benedict and St. Joseph Parish Catholic Community Historic
District (historic district), the City of St. Joseph and their consultants have modified the proposed project to
help minimize impacts to the identified historic properties. The new proposed project includes moving a
portion of Field Street to the south of the historic district so as to avoid severing the district, and is described
below (please see enclosed revised preferred alternative map).
The City of St. Joseph is planning for the development of collector roadways in the southern portion of the
City. The purpose of these roadways is to provide safe and efficient movement in the growing areas of St.
Joseph south of Minnesota Street. The roadways are needed to provide transportation connections for
existing and planned development in this area of the City, provide access to the arterial system, provide
appropriate collector road~spacing for a developing area, and relieve existing and future traffic needs on other
existing area roadways.
Two east-west roadways are proposed along with extensions of an existing north-south roadway. The first
roadway is located approximately 0.7 miles south of Minnesota Street beginning at County Round
' 21/College Avenue and proceeding easterly to a proposed future extension of 20''' Avenue and is
approximately one mile long. The preferred second east-west roadway begins at CSAH 2, east of the
Interstate 94 (I-94) east ramps, continuing southeasterly along I-94 approximately 5700 feet, and then
continuing easterly approximately 8200 feet to the proposed future extension of 20th Avenue. The east-west
section of this roadway is more southerly then the first anal the entire roadway is anticipated to be
approximately 2.7 miles long. In order to connect the proposed east-west roadways to the arterial system,
20th Avenues will be extended south. The proposed 20~' Avenue extension is anticipated to be
approximately 1.3 miles long. In addition, an altemative was included that extended the southernmost
roadway over Interstate 94 and connected to an existing frontage road which connects with Highway 2 to the
west of the current I-94 intersection.
The City is planning to preserve a 100 foot right-of--way corridor for all of the proposed roadways. The
roadways will need to accommodate 2, 12-foot traffic lanes, 6-foot shoulders, and a 6- to 16-foot landscaped
An equal opportunity employer
median to separate the two traffic lanes. A 10-foot paved path is proposed along one side of the corridors
and a 6-foot paved sidewalk is planned for the opposite side. Dedicated right and left turn lanes are
anticipated at major intersections.
Additional Archaeological Review
In our April 17, 2006 letter, our office submitted the report, Phase 1 Archaeological Investigation of the
Proposed Field Street Corridor in St. Joseph, Stearns County, Minnesota (May 2006). No archaeological
sites were identified during the survey work. The. survey work was based on the previously defined-corridor,
which basically extended across the northern portions of Segments 2 and 3, and continued west across the St.
Benedict's campus property and connected with Highway 2 (see APE map in the previously submitted
Berger report). In order to avoid impacts to the campus and historic district, the City extended the proposed
roadway corridor to the south by extending the 20'h Street extension and by creating a southern stretch of
Segment 2 and Segment 1 parallel to the east side of I-94 and connecting to Highway 2 (please see enclosed
revised preferred alternative map): Based on the lack of archaeological sites in the previous survey,
Mn/Model's rating of the revised corridor areas as having low archaeological site potential, and the impacts
of farming, residential and roadway development, it is the determination of this office that the un-surveyed
portions of the project area have a low potential for containing intact, significant archaeological sites and that
no further survey work is required.
Other Historic Resources by Segment
Segment I, Alternative G4 extends the Field Street corridor over Interstate 94, where the road connects to a
round-about, and then ties back into an existing frontage road located on the west side of the Interstate. A
roundabout would also be constructed at the frontage road intersection with Highway 2. There are no
historic properties located within the APE for this segment, and therefore it is the determination of
this office that there would be no historic properties affected by Alternative G4.
Segment 1, Alternative G2a extends Field Street along the east side of the Interstate to the north of Lake
Sarah and intersecting with Highway 2. (Please note the current map shows the road extending to the east of
the farmstead, but the City is considering placing the road to the west of the farmstead.) The corridor would
result in the acquisition of an 80 to 100-ft.-wide portion of the southwestern corner of the Sisters of the Order
of Saint Benedict and St. Joseph Parish Catholic Community Historic District (historic district). The right-
of-way would not include a direct taking of the Monastery Woods Traditional Cultural Property (TCP),
which is a contributing element to the historic district (see Figure 21 in Landscape Research 2006 report).
The construction of the roadbed on this edge of the historic district would not adversely affect the district,
since it is very small portion of the large, overall district and does not contain key historically significant
elements of the districts.
An examination of indirect effects to the historic district and Monastery Wood TCP was also considered.
One potential indirect effect was if the proposed two-lane road would create additional noise that could
impact the contemplative space that the Woods represents to the Sisters of St. Benedict's. Noise studies were
conducted and showed that the 2030 No Build (43) versus Build (44) alternatives resulted in a one decibel
noise level difference. Both readings are below 60, well below the federal noise threshold for serene places.
The Interstate, which would parallel the G2A alternative, would be the main source for noise in the area.
The comparatively low volume of vehicles on a G2A alternative simply does not add additional noise to
make a significant difference in noise levels.
The eastern portion of the woods contains two key features: the Sister's Lodge (SN-SJC-033), and the Shrine
(SN-SJC-034). Based on the noise studies, the G2a corridor would not cause a significant increase in noise
levels that would impact this area, and there would be no views of the road from this eastern end of the
Woods. However, Lake Sarah, the wetland in the southwestern corner of the historic district, and the
topographically prominent hill towards the northwestern edge of the woods are also use areas for the Sisters
and students, and so a consideration of how the presence of the road could visually affect the use in these.
areas was considered. While the construction of Field Street will create additional roadway surface within
the viewshed from the historic properties, it is likely that the Interstate will remain a more dominant visual
feature than the Field Street corridor, due to both its size and higher elevation. Also, the City plans to
purchase a l0U-ft.-wide right-of--way for Field Street in order to accommodate atree-lined grassy median,
which may help to block part of the Field Street corridor and possibly some views of the Interstate. To
summarize, since the views from the woods to the west have already been compromised by the construction
of a four-lane interstate highway; and since the proposed corridor has the potential for some vegetation
screening, will not require large amounts retaining walls or other built elements beyond the road bed, and
will be at the same elevation as the edge of the Sister's property, it is unlikely that the Field Street Corridor
will have an adverse visual effect to the historic district or the Monastery Wood TCP.
The current owner of the parcel north of Lake Sarah that the proposed G2a alternative would go through is
slated for development by the current owner. These developments will occur regardless of if the Field Street
G2a alternative is constructed (i.e., an access road off of Highway 2 would be constructed to access the
commercial developments). Therefore, the commercial development of this area is not considered to be a
likely cumulative affect of the construction of Field Street through this parcel.
To summarize, based on the currently available information, there are no apparent adverse effects
that can be identified at this point to the Monastery Woods TCP or the historic district. However, in
the future as the design of the roadway is developed and fmalized, it is possible that adverse effects may be
identified. When design work begins, a new Section 106 review will need to be conducted (including
additional public consultation), and either a re-evaluation of the EA will be needed or a new environmental
document will be required. At that time, if adverse effects are identified, ways to avoid or minimize such
effects would need to be explored. The fact that the City might own .the G2a corridor is not a sufficient
reason to exclude other corridors that avoid or minimize the adverse effect from consideration.
Segment 2 has a northern and southern alignment. The southern alignment extends from just west of County
Road 121 east to Segment 3, and the northern alignment extends from the east side of County Road 121 and
continues east to Segment 3 (see enclosed map). There is one property within the APE for this segment: St.
Isidore Farm (SN-SJC-092). The farm is a contributing element to the historic district. It is locally
significant for its association with specialized livestock farming in Stearns Count after World War II and for
its association with agriculture at the Convent of Saint Benedict. The Phase II evaluation report identified
the historical boundaries of the farmstead, but did not state if the full boundaries retained sufficient integrity
to be considered a contributing portion of the district. Aerial photographs show the southern fields as less
wooded, open pasture land. The area has become unutilized pasture land, resulting in a change in vegetation
(i.e., more trees), and therefore no longer represent the historical land use. Due to these changes, it is the
determination of this office that the southern, portion of St. Isidore farm is anon-contributing element of the
historic district due to lack of integrity. Therefore, the taking of a portion of the southern boundary of
the farmstead for the southern roadway right-of--way will have no adverse effect on the historic .
district. The northern portion of Segment 2 will result in the acquisition of a 40-ft.-wide portion of right-of-
way along the northern edge of the St. Isidore farm. The taking of a minimal portion of land along the
northern edge of the property will not impact the farm's economical viability, and will not adversely affect
the setting, feeling, and association of the farm. Noise studies have shown that the difference between the
No Build (45) and Build (51) levels for 2030 is a 6 point difference, with both levels being below the federal
threshold level of 70. Therefore, it is the determination of this office that the northern segment of
Segment 2 will have no adverse effect to the historic district.
Segment 3 (see enclosed map) runs to the west of the Rassier Farmstead (SN-SJC-091). The Rassier
Farmstead was determined eligible for listing on the National Register under Criterion A in the area of
Agriculture. It is locally significant for its association with twentieth=century dairy farming in Stearns
County and with dairy farming in Minnesota. The property consists of the house, the dairy barn, silo,
granary, loafing shed, machine shed, chicken barn, smokehouse, machine shed/garage, and the associated
farm fields and wood lot. The character-defining features of the farmstead include the intact collection of
early-twentieth-century farm structures and the cultivated fields within the defined boundaries (see enclosed
map). As currently proposed the 100-ft. corridor preservation route would take a portion of the northwest
corner of the property, and some of the trees along the edges of the wood lot. The farmstead and cultivated
fields will be left intact, with right-of--way being acquired only along the edges of the property. While some
trees will be removed, the extensive wood lot will remain primarily intact,, and will help buffer the farmstead
from the new roadway. Noise studies have shown that the difference between the No Build (44) and Build
(52) levels for 2030 is an 8 point difference, with both levels being below the federal threshold level of ?0.
Since the corridor will only be taking portions of the property along northwestern and western edges, will not
directly impact the character-defining features of the farm, or indirectly alter the setting, feeling, or
association or the farmstead, it is the determination of this office that there will be no adverse effect to
the Rassier Farmstead as the project is currently proposed.
There are two historic properties located on Minnesota Street: The Roeder House (SN-SJC-006), which was
determined eligible during the Phase II survey, and the. l S` State Bank (SN-SJC-001), which is listed on the
National Register but no longer operates as a bank. Neither property will be affected by the proposed Field
Street alternatives. While a No Build alternative would result in more traffic on Minnesota Street, the traffic
levels are not projected to reach high enough levels that it would cause an adverse effect to either property..
Based on the project as currently proposed, it is the determination of this office that the project as
currently defined under the revised design will have no adverse impacts to historic properties. It is
possible that when design work on the roadway begins, adverse effect to historic properties may be
identified. Anew Section 106 review and environmental document will be needed at the time design work
begins, and if adverse effects are identified, alternatives need to be explored that would avoid or minimize
those adverse effects. The fact that the City might own the G2a corridor is-not a sufficient reason to exclude
other corridors that avoid or minimize the adverse effect from consideration.
Please provide any comments with 30 days of receipt of.this letter. As you know, there are a.number of
consulting parties to this review. We are copying them here, and would like to remind them that they are
also welcome to provide comments on the determinations contained herein. Our office, on behalf of the
FHWA, will consider their comments on effects to historic properties, and can reconsider any determinations
of effects based on those comments. Due to project schedules, we would like to request that all comments by
consulting parties be received within 30 days of receipt of this letter.
Thank you for your continued involvement on this project over the last two years. We appreciate your
guidance and input, along with that of the consulting.parties, and feel that we were able to avoid significance
impacts to cultural resources.
Sinc ely~j~r~
u'^~' l
Kr' ten Zschomler, RPA
Historian/Archaeologist
Cultural Resources Unit (CRU)
encs.
cc: Cheryl Martin, FHWA
Chris Cromwell, FHWA
Judy Weyrens, City of St. Joseph
Philip Welter, St. Joseph Action Group
Sister Kara Hennes, Sisters of the Order of Saint Benedict
Bill Wasner, Chair, St. Joseph Historical Society
Kenneth J. Hiemenz, Former Mayor, St. Joseph
Mn/DOT CO/CRU Project File
Margaret D. Hughes, Citizen of St. Joseph
Kirby B. Becker, St. Cloud Area Planning Org.
Brandi Popenhagen, WSB Associates
Doug Weiszhaar, WSB Associates
Lynnette Roshell, Mn/DOT State Aid
Kelvin Howieson, Mn/DOT D 3 State Aid Enginee
Joe Hudak, Mn/DOT CRU
,~ .
Aix
i ~ 3 m
gd
i
r
o q
F
k
¢~
d
I ~. ' a
'.
~'
~ Jt
!-1 .
y -
J ~.
c i f _ 1 r ..b .. . i 'Ertl ~ ~
--~
~, i ~ # ®f~~~®IIII~
v n~ 3 v y~ A D D~
e~.~ o o m m~ m~~~ n
~ ~ Z ~ n v ~ ~
0 0 ~ m
? A ~ j
m ~f U 1
~ 6
D m {
O ~
r o
0
d
O
..
::'. .'
t. , t•
_ ~
- ~ ~_.
. ~
j
i
i / ~, .
~~ / /~.
~~
,o - ~ 1
~~: C1 ~, a a ~ a ~
.~ o i ~ ~.o ~ ~ ~,
_-
~... ~.. ~
~.. /,
.i ~~~~ ~ ~
~~ ~
,~'
\\ \ \ /~ /,
\, / i
\`~ ~`
`~~ i ~ ~ ~ ~
~,/~ ~ ~ ! ~
"~ ~' ~
1
~ ~ i ~~
~~ ~~~ , ~., , l 'o l
;~ ~V e
~~ ~
~ ~ '~ l u~
~~ ~ ~ ~ ~
__
\~ ~ ~~~~ ~~~ ~~ ~ 1 i i~oz ~
~~ ~~'~ ~ , >>oo
~~\V~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , ,~
~~_, /
~~ ~~ :• /
_ ~ LAKE SARA
~ ~~ ~ ~A A~ BASIN 732
~~ ~ A ~ ~~ ~ ~ OHW = 1097.0 ~
~~~\\\ N
__/ \\ \ ~ i~~ o0(pp/ /
~ \., ~ 1~
\ \\ `~ \
1 ~~ 7
~ ~ ~ ~ ~'I~ ~ ~ ~~~ A~ ~ ~ ~~ rn
~ \~~
~ ~~ ~ ~,
i
~ ~-
~~_
~, ~~ _ ,
~~ ~(~~.
~~ ~~ ~ ,i
N
Field Street Corridor /,
S.P. 233-108-01, STP X7306-037 /~
City of St. Joseph, Minnesota o goo t~ aoo ;+
-:~O1617-OO~CAD~I AY OUT ~O&Oc t\fig_iok eSara.agn
`ry~'r ._
~;:
yy~.,, .~.__ .?.__
"4 a' ~ . tea,,,"~aJ~-'- ~a.
.-1 A@#
~.'
~ ei * . a.jait