The questions in this section are intended to prompt input and discussion with partners and community members that complement the technical findings considered below. People familiar with the study corridor can provide a depth of understanding that is not always captured in the technical analysis. Response themes or highlights from each should be summarized in the qualitative input section of the existing conditions report.
Agency Engagement
Coordinate with the project team to ask appropriate public agency staff questions such as these. Summarize responses as appropriate.
- Are areas of the corridor prone to extreme weather or flooding?
- Are there opportunities to improve resiliency of corridor assets to extreme weather, flooding or other climate change impacts?
- What stakeholders should we include regarding the topic of addressing climate change through transportation?
- Are there planned electric vehicle (EV) charging projects in the area?
- Are there projects planned in the area which could be coordinated with EV charging station development?
- Are there opportunities to integrate emission reduction strategies (transit expansion, transit service improvements, active transportation infrastructure, micromobility, transportation demand management, parking management, land use changes/land acquisition, infrastructure improvements related to traffic operations, natural systems) into the corridor?
- Does this study anticipate a capacity expansion or grade separation component on the trunk highway system which would be subject to the Transportation Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Assessment legislation? If so, then an Emissions and VMT Impact Assessment and Offset Plan may be required in subsequent project development steps. See the Emissions and VMT Impact Assessment and Offset Plan guidance for details and updates.
- In general, how can this corridor plan help reduce the environmental impact of the transportation system?
Public Engagement
Coordinate with the project team to incorporate questions such as these into public engagement activities. Summarize responses or themes as appropriate.
- Have you experienced transportation challenges due to extreme weather, such as extreme heat, heavy rain, or flooding?
- If you have an EV, where do you charge it (e.g., home, work, public charging station)?
MnDOT measures vehicle miles traveled (VMT) to understand greenhouse gas (GHG) impacts from transportation. GHGs contribute to climate change by trapping heat in the atmosphere. Transportation is Minnesota’s largest source of GHG emissions, making up about 29 percent of statewide emissions. Reducing GHGs caused by emissions in the corridor can be achieved through several strategies, including mode shift to non-motorized transportation or transit, shift from internal combustion engine vehicles (typically gasoline burning) to electric or low emissions vehicles, operational improvements, or mitigation strategies. Corridor improvements that support GHG emission reduction may also help contribute to the state’s overall GHG emission reduction goals. Per capita VMT reductions also indicate more multimodal travel and decreased congestion, in addition to GHG emission reduction.
Data
See VMT methodology described in Critical Connections: Motor Vehicles and Freight.
Documentation
See VMT methodology described in Critical Connections: Motor Vehicles and Freight.
For projects determined to be on a trunk highway and that increase lane miles by 2,500 feet or more or include a new grade-separated intersection (e.g., a new interchange), or are anticipated to have a total cost of $15,000,000 in the metropolitan area or $5,000,000 outside of the metropolitan area, refer to the Emissions and VMT Impact Assessment and Offset Plan procedure guidance which describes how project sponsors need to document emissions increases from the project and develop an emissions offset plan. While this process would occur later in project development, Guidebook users may want to give a preliminary indication of whether any potential project elements emerging from the corridor plan – such as a new interchange or added lane capacity – are likely to trigger the guidance.
Changes in the climate, such as increased flooding, extreme weather, and coastal erosion can impact MnDOT assets. Damage to roads can cause safety issues, travel delays, and costly repairs or reconstruction. Addressing areas vulnerable to impacts from climate can strengthen the resiliency of the transportation network.
Flood Potential
Data
The MnDOT Flood Event Database includes information on locations within the MnDOT right of way that have flooded in the past. The database includes information such as flood event dates, descriptions of flood conditions, and general information about flood-related roadway closures and damage. This database is for MnDOT internal use only as of the publication of this guidebook. While the MnDOT Flood Event Database attempts to capture the institutional knowledge of District maintenance and hydraulics staff, direct communication with these personnel is recommended to obtain additional details about potential flood risks within a corridor. Flooding vulnerability is also informed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) 100- and 500-year flood plain zones, which show the likelihood of an intense storm event with deep flooding in the area.
Documentation
Request flood event data for the corridor, including historic flooding events, and responses to events from MnDOT. Summarize historic flooding information from the Flood Event Database and FEMA using maps and text as relevant to show locations of past flooding, significant travel disruption, efforts to minimize flood risk, and flood risk mitigation recommendations.
Coastal Erosion Hazards (TH 61/Lake Superior only)
Coastal erosion can be a hazard for corridors along Lake Superior. The Arrowhead Regional Development Commission maintains an online mapping tool which shows coastal erosion potential along Lake Superior’s north shore. Understanding this potential should be considered when making improvement decisions along a corridor in proximity to these hazards.
Data
The primary data for this item is the assessment of erosion potential of segments of the Lake Superior Coast, available from Arrowhead Regional Development Commission data.
Documentation
Request the data layer for Lake Superior coastal erosion from the Arrowhead Regional Development Commission. This data can be overlaid with maps of the corridor to identify areas of the corridor within 150 feet of Lake Superior coast segments marked as erosion hazards.
MnDOT’s Resilience Improvement Plan (RIP) notes that assets in these areas should be evaluated by MnDOT for potential impacts from erosion. Consult with MnDOT Office of Sustainability and Public Health (OSPH) staff for updates.
Vulnerable Slope Area
Corridors with segments near sloped terrain may be at risk for slope failure as a result of impacts of heavy rainfall, flooding, and other weather or geological risks. Vulnerable slopes identified during a corridor plan may be avoided or mitigated as part of the project to avoid damage from potential future slope failure.
Data
MnDOT has developed a planning level GIS-based slope vulnerability tool, which describes vulnerable slopes in Minnesota. The model can be applied across Minnesota and includes three primary functions: 1) identify past slope failures, 2) model the causative factors of past slope failures and how they vary locally, and 3) model the risk of new slope failures. To date, MnDOT has conducted vulnerability assessments on slopes within a half-mile of the majority of MnDOT managed roadways across the state, which are captured in a series of MnDOT Slope Vulnerability Assessments. For corridors in these areas, guidebook users can use the model results documented in the assessments, which describe slopes in the following categories: action recommended, further evaluation, monitoring, and no action recommended.
Documentation
Guidebook users should incorporate vulnerable slope information from the MnDOT Slope Vulnerability Assessments into project maps, which will indicate risk category of the slopes (action recommended, further evaluation, monitoring, or no action recommended). The risk category of slopes should be considered when developing plans to allow for coordination of slope abatement if needed. For areas not covered in the Vulnerability Assessments, guidebook users should coordinate with MnDOT staff to determine whether or how to address slope risk in the corridor.
EV Charging Station Locations
MnDOT conducted an analysis of EV charging station needs to build out the EV charging capability of the MnDOT road network. The analysis shows “clusters” in areas identified as needing an EV charging station – each cluster includes multiple sites which could be used for a future station. MnDOT and partners may align corridor improvement projects with EV station development if clusters exist along the corridor.
Data
Locations of existing and recommended long-distance charging station locations are available from the EVINA Long Distance Charging Analysis Dashboard. Additional information on existing or proposed charging stations may also be obtained from local and regional partners.
Documentation
Identify any existing charging stations within the corridor, any cluster areas recommended for EV charging within the corridor, and any locally planned charging stations not included in the Long Distance Charging Analysis Dashboard. This information can be provided in text or a table and supplemented with mapping if helpful for clarity.
EV Registrations in the Corridor Area
Electric vehicle registrations in the corridor area contributes to a reduction in GHG emissions (though not VMT). While MnDOT has conducted analyses of EV charging station needs, corridor plans may also include EV registration trends over time.
Data
The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission maintains a list of registered EVs by ZIP code.
Documentation
Show EV registrations in ZIP codes intersecting the corridor over time (suggest at least past 5 years). This information can be provided in a chart or a table and supplemented with mapping if helpful for clarity.
Multiple strategies may be used to foster healthy and vibrant places that reduce disparities and promote healthy outcomes for people, the environment, and the economy. Guidebook users should summarize how healthy equitable communities objectives were considered and document it with the climate action assessment.
Healthy Equitable Communities
Use a combination of demographic information (Step 2), technical input and input from community members and agency staff to provide responses or observations related to the questions below.
- Are underserved communities disproportionately impacted by flooding in the corridor?
- How are underserved communities impacted by extreme weather? For example, extreme heat impacts transit riders, especially at stops without shelters.
- How do mitigation strategies impact vulnerable users?
- Are electric vehicle charging stations accessible to underserved communities?
- Are there electric buses in use or planned? What about low-emission fuel buses (propane, hybrid, etc.)? These buses are quieter and produce less local pollution, improving the quality of life for residents along those routes.
