Laserfiche WebLink
(2) Noise <br />I have heard that, after the project is done, the noise levels in my neighborhood will be <br />about the same as they are now. It is already too noisey. The state should take effective <br />steps to mitigate the interstate traffic noise that is currently disturbing our neighborhood. <br />The state should take steps to complete the sound barrier, and fill in the sound barrier gap <br />that is just east of the railroad. <br />Mn /DOT Response: TheUnweave project proposes to build a sound barrier adjacent to <br />the Twin Lakes residential neighborhood west of the railroad. This sound barrier will be <br />20 feet high except at the ends where it will be stepped down. Moreover, the barrier will <br />be built on top of the roadway embankment, so throughout most of its length adjacent to <br />the Twin Lake residential neighborhood, it will be well above the adjacent residential <br />properties (see 35CON694 cross sections from station 412 through 420). The proposed <br />barrier will be acoustically effective, meaning that at the time of its construction it will <br />reduce the noise levels behind the wall by 5 decibels or more. Even if population and <br />traffic volumes continue to increase in the future as projected (so that by 2025 the <br />interstate carries 1.5 times the traffic that it does today) the noise barrier will continue to <br />significantly reduce noise to a level at or below State daytime noise standards for most of <br />the residences adjacent to Twin Lake Trail. For residences near the south end of the <br />proposed barrier, noise based on 2025 traffic projections will still be near or lower than <br />what is experienced today. The area adjacent to westbound I -694 just east of the railroad <br />tracks is currently rural. If the city approves a residential plat for this area by May 1, <br />2004, the state will build a sound barrier in this area if it would be acoustically effective <br />and cost effective. Alternatively, the state could have the plan provide for a wall in that <br />area if the city would pay for its cost. <br />(3) Trees <br />The state is planning to disturb all of the surface between I -694WB and Twin Lake Trail. <br />This means that we will lose all of the trees on the south side of Twin Lake Trail that <br />have been shielding our view of the interstate. Those trees also shield us from the <br />freeway noise. If the state removes those trees we will have a view of a 20 foot high <br />noise wall on top of an embanlunent. The state should save these trees by realigning the <br />roadway (see #1 above) or by limiting the impact of the embankment. If the state will not <br />do this, they should invest in landscaping to replace the view of trees that they are taking <br />away. <br />Mn /DOT Response: A portion of the trees adjacent to Twin Lake Trail are on state <br />owned right -of -way. If these trees have been aesthetically pleasing to the adjacent <br />property owners, that is good. However, since our plans require use of all of the right-of- <br />way we own in the area adjacent to much of Twin Lake Trail, many of the trees in that <br />area must be removed to make way for construction. Another portion of the trees in this <br />vicinity are on a narrow strip of city owned easement along the south edge of Twin Lake <br />Trail, which is contiguous with the state owned right -of -way. For the following reasons, <br />we anticipate that it will be impractical to save all of the existing trees along the right -of- <br />way line. <br />7 <br />