Corridor Planning Guidebook

The questions in this section are intended to prompt input and discussion beyond the technical data 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. Note this is a planning level review only and not an Early Coordination Request or a formal NEPA/MEPA activity.

• Are there potential or known contaminated sites within the corridor?
• Have there been previous environmental site assessments in the corridor?
• Are there protected resources within or near the corridor that are of particular interest to your agency or to the community?
• Are there existing and/or proposed cultural uses of the corridor that should inform planning?
• Are there parks, trails, recreation areas, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, or historic properties within or near the corridor?
• Are you aware of any protected species within or near the corridor?
• Does the local watershed district have concerns regarding water quality, flooding, or related issues in the area?
• Are there opportunities or actions underway to improve water quality or stormwater management?
• Are there large-scale development projects (commercial, residential, industrial) planned in or near the corridor that may impact environmental resources?
• 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.

• Are there places in the corridor where the road or other infrastructure is harming the quality of the environment??
• What locations hold significance to the community’s history and identity?
• Are there cultural uses of the corridor that should inform planning?
• Are there areas on the roadway or ditches that flood frequently?
• Are there recreational or green spaces you would like to see better connected?
• What improvements in this corridor could make your neighborhood a healthier place to live?

The table below shows the technical topic measurements and data to be included in the existing and future conditions analysis for System Stewardship: Environment. See Appendix C: Plan Type Data Matrix for direction on level of detail and items that may be optional based on corridor plan type. The items below also may be modified by the scope of work for an individual corridor plan.

Table 9. System Stewardship: Environment Technical Topics and Data

There is potential for contaminated materials to be encountered during construction activities. Early detection of potential hazards during the planning phase can minimize project delays and environmental impacts. Federal and state laws, such as the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) or “Superfund,” are frameworks to remediate contaminated sites.

Data

The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and the Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA) maintain separate searchable databases of known contaminated sites and environmental permits and registrations. Using the MPCA “What’s in my Neighborhood” database, the number and location of active and inactive sites and type of contamination can be identified, listed, and mapped.

The MDA is the lead agency for response to and cleanup of agricultural chemical contamination in Minnesota. The MDA online database (also called “What’s in my Neighborhood”) contains information about past emergencies, small spills and investigations, incident investigation boundaries, and contingency areas related to agricultural contamination.

For future proposed project work following a corridor study, a Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) may be warranted to identify potentially hazardous waste sites within the project area that may be disturbed during construction. If the results of the Phase 1 assessment require further investigation, a Phase II ESA may also be needed to further evaluate the extent and composition of the contaminated materials within the project area.

Documentation

Summarize the information on contaminated sites using a map and/or a table showing the location and type of contaminated sites within approximately ½ mile of the corridor.
Example Summary: MPCA and MDA “What’s in my Neighborhood” Sites within ½ Mile of the Corridor

Data

The Minnesota State Historic Inventory Portal database should be used to identify cultural and historic resources within or near the study area. The database output includes the property name, address, property type, and historic inventory number. Historic and cultural resources may include highways and bridges, structures and properties such as homes and other buildings, and other resources.

During the project design phase, after planning is complete, more detailed information on historic and cultural resources is typically obtained through formal consultation with the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO).

Following the planning phase, projects with a federal nexus are required to comply with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act with respect to identifying potential effects on historic properties. That process is not addressed here.

Documentation

Summarize understanding of historic and cultural resources within 1/2 mile of the corridor using a table and a map. At minimum include property name, address, property type, and historic inventory number.

Section 4(f) and 6(f) resources are recreational, natural or historic resources with special protections. Identifying these resources during planning is helpful to avoid or minimize potential impacts.

Data: Section 4(f)

Parks, trails, recreation areas, wildlife and waterfowl refuges and historic resources may be subject to protections under Section 4(f) of theDepartment of Transportation Act of 1966. Section 4(f) applies to projects that receive funding from or require approval by an agency of the USDOT. If a future transportation improvement would require the use of or otherwise impact one of these properties, projects must seek to avoid, minimize or mitigate impacts.

There is no list of Section 4(f) properties. Instead, to identify the resource types listed above, planners should use available sources such as online maps, GIS data, or site visits. Locations of wildlife and waterfowl refuges can be identified using the Minnesota DNR website. For historic properties, see the Historic and Cultural Resources discussion above.

Data: Section 6(f)

Corridor studies also should seek to identify properties protected under Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act (LAWCON) using the list provided by the MN DNR. LAWCON helps preserve, develop, and provide accessibility to outdoor recreation resources. The act stipulates that any land acquired or developed with LAWCON funds cannot be converted to other than outdoor recreational use unless equivalent replacement land is provided.

As with Section 4(f), efforts must be made to avoid, minimize, and mitigate impacts on Section 6(f) properties. If the State is acquiring land subject to Section 6(f), the 6(f) additional coordination with the DNR is required to ensure procedural requirements must be satisfied and documentation provided in the environmental review document.

Documentation

Identify potential Section 4(f) and 6(f) resources using the sources and methods described above. Summarize information in a list or map, as appropriate. Identify the resource and type, its location, and data source. At the planning level, it is not expected that a definitive understanding of the applicability of Section 4(f)/6(f) to all such resources will be known.

Transportation projects may affect rare, threatened, or endangered species or affect sensitive habitats that support them. Early identification of these species is important to avoid impacts and ensure compliance with state and federal requirements. MnDOT corridor studies should document the presence of threatened and endangered species in advance of a full environmental review that may occur following the study.

Planners should identify both state and federally designated threatened and endangered species within a ½-mile buffer of the study corridor.

Data

The National Heritage Information System (NHIS) is managed by the MNDNR and identifies the State’s rare plant, animal, and native plant communities, and other rare features. Users without an NHIS database license account must request a database search directly from the DNR.

The information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) is a USFWS online planning tool that can be used to determine whether any Federally listed species, critical habitat, migratory birds, or other natural resources may occur in the corridor study area.

Documentation

Summarize threatened and endangered species information by listing the identified species by category (e.g., State or Federal; Endangered/Threatened/Special Concern). The results should not include specific location information.

Data: Wetlands

The United States Fish and Wildlife (USFWS) Service National Wetland Inventory (NWI) and Minnesota NWI should be used to identify the potential presence of wetlands in the study area. Additional attributes for wetlands can be obtained by downloading the NWI and PWI GIS shapefile data from the MN Geospatial Commons. The 3DHP hydrography map found on the USGS National Map is an additional resource that can be used to identify additional streams and waterbodies and their potential connections to one another.

Data: Public Waters

The MN DNR Public Waters Inventory (PWI) should be utilized to explore the presence of public waters, which includes basins, wetlands, and watercourses within the study area.

Data: Floodplains

Floodplains and flood hazard information for the project area should be identified using the FEMA Flood Map Service Center. The 100-year floodplain should be identified; if available, the 500-year floodplain also may be included. Users are also recommended to download FEMA GIS data from MN Geospatial Commons. More localized floodplain inventory information may be available from local watershed districts or watershed management organizations, cities, or counties.

Documentation

Summarize wetlands and water resources information in one or more maps that show location of the resource in relation to the project corridor study area.

This section identifies topics that are optional for inclusion as identified by the project team.

Ecological Connectivity and Resilience

The Guidebook assumes that other subtopics, in particular Threatened and Endangered Species, adequately capture this topic for most corridor plans. However, a more robust corridor study could consider ecological connectivity and resilience, which includes but is not limited to threatened and endangered species considerations, more directly. See The Nature Conservancy Resilient Landscape Mapping tool for further information. 

Multiple strategies may be used in an environmental analysis aimed at fostering healthy and vibrant places that reduce disparities and promote healthy outcomes for people, the environment, and the economy. Guidebook users should prepare a summary of how healthy equitable communities were considered and include it in the memorandum or report that documents the assessment of environmental topics.

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 there communities or populations who may be disproportionately adversely affected by a project in this corridor?
• How can the adjacent or nearby environment be improved through a transportation project in this corridor?
• What do the environmental and cultural resources in the corridor mean to the community?
• Does the roadway corridor as it exists today present public health challenges? Are there ways these challenges could be improved through a transportation project?
• How does the existing transportation system support employment and economic development in the corridor area (such as by providing access to jobs or future developments)? How can the transportation system be improved to better support employment and economic development in the corridor area?