NORTH MENDOTA PARKWAY - Dane County,...

NORTH MENDOTA PARKWAY

SCREENING ADDENDUM

Dane County and Municipalities North Mendota Parkway Screening Addendum

Prepared by Strand Associates, Inc.® A-1 S:\MAD\1100--1199\1124\006\Wrd\Report\Addendum.doc\042809

1.0 BACKGROUND In January of 2009 a draft screening report was presented to the North Mendota Oversight and Implementation Committee. This report provided broad descriptions and impacts for four west alternatives and three east alternatives. At a subsequent public meeting held in February of 2009, some of those commenting questioned why two alternatives had been dismissed without being incorporated in the screening report. One alternative is a far north alternative known in meetings as Alternative 5. The other alternative travels south of the Dorn Creek corridor, along Onken Road, and has been referenced as Alternative 16 in previous meetings. The committee felt that because these two alignments continued to generate some public support, they merited a documented review. This screening report addendum provides this review for comparison with the other alternatives provided in the screening analysis. Two variations of Alternative 16 are provided for review. The factors used to develop these alternatives and evaluation criteria are the same as in the previous report. 2.0 TRAFFIC The traffic discussion presented in the screening report is relevant for these alternatives. No additional discussion is needed. 3.0 ALTERNATIVE

ADDITIONS A. West Alternative

Additions Figure 3.0-1 illustrates the two (three) west alternatives being considered. This section briefly describes each of the two additional west alternatives. Section 4 provides a more detailed description of the impacts associated with each alternative.

Figure 3.0-1 West Alternative Additions



1. Alternative 16W

Alternative 16W connects with the US 12 roadway about 0.9 miles north of the existing Parmenter Street interchange–similar to the connection location for Alternative 15W. Because this connection is close to the existing interchange, a split-diamond interchange configuration is likely needed and is described in Section 1 of the screening report. This alignment then travels easterly and then southerly until it meets Balzer Road. Balzer Road would become a cul-de-sac at this location. Alternative 16W continues easterly until it meets County Q, about 800 feet south of Onken Road. Depending on the type of facility, County Q would either be an at-grade intersection or an interchange. Also, depending on the type of facility, Alternative 16W’s crossing of Pheasant Branch Road would either be an at-grade intersection or a full grade separation. West of US 12 a new local road is constructed that travels west and then north to meet County K. This would be County K’s connection to the North Mendota Parkway. Alternative 16W crosses the planned Bellefontaine corridor, which would be difficult to realign. Alternative 16W can only be paired with Alternative 16E; no other combinations exist for this alternative. 2. Alternative 16W Modified

Alternative 16W modified has a similar US 12 connection as Alternative 16W except that it veers to the north and connects with County Q about 300 feet north of Onken Road. This modification allows the Bellefontaine corridor to be realigned if desired. Other characteristics are similar. Depending on the type of facility, County Q would either be an at-grade intersection or an interchange. Also, depending on the type of facility, Alternative 16W’s crossing of Pheasant Branch Road would either be an at-grade intersection or a full grade separation. West of US 12 a new local road is constructed that travels west and then north to meet County K. This would be County K’s connection to the North Mendota Parkway. Alternative 16W modified can only be paired with Alternative 16E modified. 3. Alternative 5W Alternative 5W connects with US 12 about 1.5 miles north of the Parmenter Street interchange at the same location as Alternative 4W. As with Alternative 14W, it also could have its own dedicated diamond interchange that would not be connected to the Parmenter Street interchange. Alternative 5W then travels northeasterly along a drainage swale crossing Fisher Road until it is about one-quarter mile north of Fisher Road. From here it travels easterly until it reaches County Q. Alternative 4W has a local road connection to County K west of the US 12 alignment. No other local road modifications are needed. Fisher Road and Pheasant Branch Road would either be at-grade intersections or full grade separations, depending on the facility type. Alternative 5W can only be paired with Alternative 5E.

NO

RTH

ME

ND

OTA

EN

VIR

ON

ME

NT

AL

AN

D T

RA

NS

PO

RTA

TIO

N S

TU

DY

WE

ST

AL

IGN

ME

NTS

DA

NE

CO

UN

TY P

AR

K D

EP

AR

TM

EN

TD

AN

E C

OU

NTY

, WIS

CO

NS

IN

FIGURE 11-124.006

ACKER,RANDYR; ET AL

ACKER,WILLIAM A& SALLY A

BERNARDSLIVING TR,

ANDREW H,;

BURCALOW, LARRY &

KAREN J ET AL

CARR, CHARLES

E;

ENDRES,RUSSELL H& JEAN M

ENDRES,RUSSELL

H; HENSEN TR,WILFRED V &KIMBERLY J,;

KIPPLEY FAMILY LIMITEDPARTNERSHIP,; ET AL

LAUFENBERG,DEAN

J; ET AL

LAUFENBERG, HENRY C & SHIRLEY C

MEINHOLZ LLC,; ET AL

METROPOLITANREFUSE

DISTRICT,;

WAGNER FAMILY TR,; WAGNER LIVING TR,ELIZABETH ANN ET AL

ACKER TR,; ET AL

ACKER TR,; ET AL

ACKER, LAWRENCE F & THARSILLA

ACKER,LEO J &

KIMBERLY M

ACKER, LEO J& KIMBERLY M

ACKER, ROGER J;

ACKER, VALERIA;

DORN,ALPHONSE P& DONNA G

HEISE, BRUCE W & MARY E

HENSEN TR, WILFREDV & KIMBERLY J,

; HENSEN TR,JAMES R & SU

HENSEN TR, WILFREDV & KIMBERLY J,

; HENSEN TR,JAMES R & SU

ROTH,DANIEL &

SHARON ET AL

ROTH, DANIEL& SHARON

ET AL

ROTH,DANIEL &

SHARON ET AL

ROTH, DANIEL& SHARON

ET AL

THEIS,EUGENE N &

LOUISE L

WAGNER, WILLIAM E &

JOHN G ET AL

WAGNERSMILKY WAY

FARM,;

ZIEGLER, GREGORY L & CHERYL L

Balzer Road

Fisher Road

K County Highway

12 U

nited States

Highw

ay

Hig

h R

oad

Unn

amed

Oncken Road

Zieg

ler R

oad

Unnamed

12 U

nited States

Highw

ay

Ram

ps

Ram

ps

Wer

gin W

ay

Har

dy Tr

ail

Q Cou

nty High

way

Q C

ount

y H

ighw

ay

Phe

asan

t Bra

nch

Roa

dP

heas

ant B

ranc

h R

oad

T o w n o f W e s t p o r t

T o w n o f S p r i n g f i e l dC i t y o f M i d d l e t o n

S:\MAD\1100--1199\1124\006\Data\GIS\Figures\Alignments\Alignment 5 16 16Mod West 11x17.mxd

0 500 1,000250

Feet

Legend5W

5W Local Road

16W

16W Local Road

16W Modified

16W Modified Local Road

Wetland Boundary

Proposed NRA Boundary

Existing NRA Boundary



B. East Alternative Additions Figure 3.0-2 illustrates the three east alternative additions. This section briefly describes each of the three east alternatives. Section 4 provides a more detailed description of the impacts associated with each alternative.

1. Alternative 16E Alternative 16E connects to County Q on its west end about 800 feet south of the Onken Road intersection. Alternative 16E’s connection with County Q could be either an at-grade signalized intersection or a partial cloverleaf interchange. Alternative 16E then travels easterly until County M, where it bends northerly and generally follows the County M corridor. County M does not connect directly to Alternative 16E. There are two options:

a. County M could be rerouted onto North Shore Bay Drive and join Alternative 16E

at a signalized intersection with County K.

b. County M could be a cul-de-sac at the Governor Nelson park entrance. With this option, County M east of County Q essentially becomes a local access road, and all County M traffic moves onto the North Mendota Parkway.

With both options, Onken Road remains in place as it becomes a service road accessing properties to the north and south.

2. Alternative 16E Modified Alternative 16E Modified connects to County Q on its west end just north of the Onken Road intersection. Alternative 16E modified’s intersection with County Q could be either as an at-grade signalized intersection or as a diamond interchange. Alternative 16E modified then travels easterly just south of Onken Road until it meets County M. With this arrangement, Onken Road could be removed or modified to provide property access only. County M would connect with

Figure 3.0-2 Additional East Alternatives

NO

RTH

ME

ND

OTA

EN

VIR

ON

ME

NT

AL

AN

D T

RA

NS

PO

RTA

TIO

N S

TU

DY

EA

ST

ALI

GN

ME

NTS

DA

NE

CO

UN

TY P

AR

K D

EP

AR

TM

EN

TD

AN

E C

OU

NTY

, WIS

CO

NS

IN

FIGURE 11-124.006

ANDERSON,DONALD L;

CARR, CHARLES

E;

HELLENBRAND, KENNETH J &

JACQUELINE ANNE

KIPPLEY FAMILY LIMITEDPARTNERSHIP,; ET AL

OLSON,DONALD

G & LINDA K

PAULSONINVESTMENTS

LLC,;

PURDY,LORI A &DANA C

REIS TR, ROGER H,; RIPP REV MARITAL TR,

VERNON J & DORIS M SPAHN,; ET AL

SHILLINGLAWTR, DARLENE

A,; ET AL

SMITH,RICHARD G &

NANCY M

WALSH, DOROTHYM; O'KEEFE REALESTATE LLP ET AL

WESTPORTCORNERS

LLC,;

WI DNR,; ET AL

JACOBSEN, SAM J;

JACOBSEN, SAM J;

KIPPLEYFAMILY LTD

PARTNERSHIP,;

KIPPLEYFAMILY LTD

PARTNERSHIP,;

RIPP, LEON J & MARY ANN

THEIS,EUGENE N &

LOUISE L

WI DNR,;

WI DNR,;

WI DNR,;

ZIEGLER REVTR, RICHARD

J,; ET AL

ZIEGLER REVTR, RICHARD

J,; ET AL

ZIEGLER,ROMAN &ALICE R

T o w n o f W e s t p o r tT o w n o f

S p r i n g f i e l d

L a k e M e n d o t a

C i t y o f M i d d l e t o n

Indianola Drive

Balzer Road

Labuwi Lane

Auchter Lane

Mary Lake Road

Zieg

ler R

oad

Oncken Road

Mansfield

Road

Sun

s et T

rai l

K County Highway

Reyno

lds Av

enue

Wer

gin W

ay

Mar

ia W

ay

Har

dy Tr

ail

Q C

ount

y H

ighw

ay

No rth

Sh or e

Bay

Dri ve

North

Shore Bay Drive

M County Highway

M C

ount

y H

ighw

ay

Sh i

lling

Lane

Woo

d lan

d D

r ive

S:\MAD\1100--1199\1124\006\Data\GIS\Figures\Alignments\Alignment 5 16 16Mod East 11x17.mxd

0 500 1,000250

Feet

Legend5E

5E Local Road

16E

16E Local Road

16E Modified

16E Modified Local Road

Wetland Boundary

Proposed NRA Boundary

Existing NRA Boundary



Alternative 16E modified as either an at-grade signalized intersection or as an interchange, depending on facility type. It would then travel north to its connection with County K/County M. 3. Alternative 5E Alternative 5E connects with Alternative 5W. It travels about one-half mile north of County K until it veers southeast to meet County M just west of Sixmile Creek. The Alternative 5E connection with County Q could be a signalized intersection or diamond interchange, depending on facility type. The County Q/County K intersection could remain as a signalized intersection in its current location. County M would be realigned to the west so that it intersects with the North Mendota Parkway at a tee intersection near Shilling Lane. It is likely this intersection would need to be signalized.

4.0 ALTERNATIVE IMPACTS A. West Alternatives

1. Alternative 16W

a. Direct Impacts The direct impacts associated with Alternative 16W are shown in Figure 4.0-1. Mapping this alternative will cover about 147.1 acres. Most of this land is agricultural. This alternative borders the north portion of a quarry near the US 12 connection, generally avoiding serious impacts to the operation. The alignment bisects the Roth farm and severs the Randy Acker farm and a portion of the Hensen farm as it veers southeast. To the east, Alternative 16W would impact the Balzer Road border of property owned by the Hensens, Ackers, and Laufenbegs. West of US 12, the local road associated with Alternative 16W would sever land owned by the Roths as it connects to County K.

Figure 4.0-1 Alternative 16W Impacts



b. Consistency with Land Use Plans See Section 1.04 of the screening report for summaries of the plans referenced below and a statement regarding how consistency with each plan was evaluated.

(1) The City of Middleton Northwest Quadrant Plan: Alternative 16W is

generally consistent with the City’s Northwest Quadrant Plan because it would skirt the northern edge of the City’s nearer-term (≤ 20 years) growth area, but it is still close enough to this area to efficiently serve residents of these future neighborhoods.

(2) The City of Middleton Comprehensive Plan: Alternative 16W is

generally consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan because it avoids bisecting the City’s nearer-term (≤ 20 years) growth area. However, the route is located about one-quarter mile south of County K, which was identified by the City as the generally preferred location for the North Mendota Parkway corridor.

(3) City of Middleton/Town of Springfield Intergovernmental Agreement:

Alternative 16W is generally consistent with the City and Town’s intergovernmental agreement because it skirts the northern edge of the area planned for annexation within the 20-year agreement period.

(4) The Bellefontaine Collector: Alternative 16W is not consistent with the

City’s Official Map with respect to the proposed location of the Bellefontaine Collector because the Parkway crosses directly over it approximately midway between Pheasant Branch Road and County Q. Additionally, both Alternative 16W and Bellfontaine would intersection with County Q within 600 feet of each other. Under this arrangement, Bellefontaine might have to connect directly to the North Mendota Parkway, which would probably preclude a future freeway facility, or would have to be routed due east after its crossing of Pheasant Branch Road to intersect County Q south of a nearby subdivision to provide appropriate spacing from the Alternative 16W route.

(5) Town of Springfield Comprehensive Plan: Alternative 16W is generally

consistent with the Town’s Comprehensive Plan because although it would result in several farm severences, it is located south of County K, placing it adjacent to or in proximity to the City of Middleton’s growth area and separating it from larger farming operations north of County K.

c. Ability to Meet Transportation Demands

Alternative 16W is the southernmost of the western alignments and closely mirrors the travel desire lines described in Section 1. The distance from the Parmenter interchange to County Q is 3.3 miles.



2. Alternative 16W Modified

a. Direct Impacts The direct impacts associated with Alternative 16W Modified are shown in Figure 4.0-2. Mapping this alternative will cover about 157.6 acres. Most of this land is agricultural. It would require three residential relocations. This alternative borders the north portion of a quarry near the US 12 connection, generally avoiding serious impacts to the operation. The alignment bisects the Roth farm and severs the Lawrence Acker Farm and a portion of the Hensen farm as it veers Northeast. To the east, Alternative 16W would impact the border of property owned by the Bernards and the City of Middleton. The alternative does fall on the south edge of land designated for the Natural Resource Area, yet this should not hinder its function. West of US 12, the local road associated with Alternative 16W Modified would sever land owned by the Roths as it connects to County K.

b. Consistency with Land Use Plans

See Section 1.04 of the screening report for summaries of the plans referenced below and a statement regarding how consistency with each plan was evaluated.

(1) The City of Middleton Northwest Quadrant Plan: Alternative 16W

Modified is generally consistent with the City’s Northwest Quadrant Plan because it would be located about one-half mile north of Balzer Road and the northern edge of the City’s nearer-term (≤ 20 years) growth area, but it is still close enough to this area to efficiently serve residents of these future neighborhoods.

Figure 4.0-2 Alternative 16W Modified Impacts



(2) The City of Middleton Comprehensive Plan: Alternative 16W is generally consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan because it avoids bisecting the City’s nearer-term (≤ 20 years) growth area. However, the route is located about one-quarter mile south of County K, which was identified by the City as the generally preferred location for the North Mendota Parkway corridor.

(3) City of Middleton/Town of Springfield Intergovernmental Agreement: Alternative 16W is generally consistent with the City and Town’s intergovernmental agreement because it is located about one-quarter mile north of the northern edge of the area planned for annexation within the 20-year agreement period.

(4) The Bellefontaine Collector: Alternative 16W Modified generally is not consistent with the City’s Official Map with respect to the proposed location of the Bellefontaine Collector because the Parkway travels parallel and adjacent to it. However, with this modifed Alternative, the Bellefontaine corridor could be realigned to the south to line up with Balzer Road. This would provide about 1200 feet of separation between the Parkway and Bellefontaine as they connect with County Q.

(5) Town of Springfield Comprehensive Plan: Alternative 16W Modifed is generally consistent with the Town’s Comprehensive Plan because although it would result in several farm severences, it is located south of County K, placing it in the close proximity to the City of Middleton’s growth area and separating it from larger farming operations north of County K.


Alternative 16W is near the south of the western alignments and closely mirrors the travel desire lines described in Section 1. The distance from the Parmenter interchange to County Q is 3.2 miles

3. Alternative 5W

a. Direct Impacts The direct impacts associated with Alternative 5W are shown in Figure 4.0-3. Mapping this alternative will cover about 127.9 acres, most of it being agricultural land. It travels through a drainage swale and just west of Pheasant Branch Road it turns east follows a quarter section line about one-half mile north of County K. Because of this, Alternative 5W severs the two Acker farms and the Wagner Milky Way farm as it travels along the drainaige . At Pheasant Branch Road it then travels along the north border of the Wagner and Kippley farms. Alternative 5W does not require any relocations, which is one advantage of this alternative.




See Section 1.04 for summaries of the plans referenced below and a statement regarding how consistency with each plan was evaluated.

(1) The City of Middleton Northwest Quadrant Plan: Alternative 5W is generally inconsistent with the City’s Northwest Quadrant Plan because it would be located more than a mile north of the City’s northernmost growth boundary and would not adequately serve the City.

(2) The City of Middleton Comprehensive Plan: Alternative 5W is

generally inconsistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan because it is located a mile north of County K and would not adequately serve the City.

(3) City of Middleton/Town of Springfield Intergovernmental Agreement:

Alternative 5W is generally consistent with the City and Town intergovernmental agreement because it would not bisect the area identified for nearer-term City growth. Nevertheless, as described in paragraphs a. and b. above, the location of Alternative 5W is likely too far north to efficiently serve the City.

(4) The Bellefontaine Collector: Alternative 5W is generally consistent

with the City’s Official Map with respect to the location of the Bellefontaine Collector because the Parkway alternative would be located roughly two miles north of this planned collector and, therefore, would not interfere with or duplicate its function.

Figure 4.0-3 Alternative 5W Impacts



(5) The Town of Springfield Comprehensive Plan: Alternative 5W is generally inconsistent with the Town’s Comprehensive Plan because although it would result in fewer impacts to existing farms than the other west alternatives, it would be located one-half to one mile north of County K in an area where several larger farm operations are located and where very long-term agricultural preservation has been planned.


Alternative 5W is the northernmost of the western alignments and does not closely mirror the travel desire lines described in Section 1. The distance from the Parmenter interchange to County Q is 4.7 miles.

B. East Alternatives

1. Alternative 16E

a. Direct Impacts The direct impacts associated with Alternative 16E are shown in Figure 4.0-4. Mapping this alternative will cover about 110.9 acres, of which 67.7 acres is agricultural and the remainder is residential and business. Much of this acreage, while agricultural, is in transition to residential and mixed-unit developments. This alternative would also have about five residential relocations on the bend south of its junction with County K. Currently there are development proposals submitted to the City of Middleton for this land. Alternative 16E would upset the northern quarter mile of these plans.

Figure 4.0-4 Alternative 16E Impacts



The two access alternatives for County M would have different effects. If County M were to continue onto North Shore Bay Drive, County M would continue to carry moderate traffic volumes. If County M were to end in a cul-de-sac at Governor Nelson State Park, County M east of County Q would become more of a local access road with substantially lower traffic volumes.



(1) City of Middleton Northwest Quadrant Plan: Alternative 16E is

generally inconsistent with the City’s Northwest Quadrant Plan because it would be located south of Oncken Road and would bisect future City development planned for the area south of Oncken Road.

(2) City of Middleton Comprehensive Plan: Alternative 16E is generally

inconsistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan because it would bisect future City development planned for the area south of Oncken Road.

(3) Town of Westport Comprehensive Plan: Alternative 16E is generally

inconsistent with the Town’s Comprehensive Plan because it would be located south of Dorn Creek and Oncken Road. This area is designated for commercial near County Q, residential midway between County Q and County M, and agricultural and open space closer to County M.


Alternative 16E closely mirrors the travel desire lines described in Section 1. The distance from County Q to the County M/K junction is 2.2 miles.

2. Alternative 16E Modified

a. Direct Impacts The direct impacts associated with Alternative 16E Modified are shown in Figure 4.0-5. Mapping this alternative will cover about 93 acres, of which 43.5 acres is agricultural and the remainder is residential and business. Much of this acreage, while agricultural, is in transition to residential and mixed unit developments. This alternative would also have about five residential relocations on the bend south of its junction with County K. Currently there are development proposals submitted to the City of Middleton for this land. Since this alignment is closer to Onken Road, less disruption to this development proposal will occur, yet there will still be impacts.



Additionally, since Alternative 16E Modified is closer to Onken Road, there will be four residential and one farm relocation on the south side of Onken Road.



(1) City of Middleton Northwest Quadrant Plan: Alternative 16E Modified

is generally inconsistent with the City’s Northwest Quadrant Plan because it would be located just south of Oncken Road and would impact future City development planned for the area south of Oncken Road. However, Alternative 16E Modified does not split this Planned Development Area to the same extent as Alernative 16E.

(2) City of Middleton Comprehensive Plan: Alternative 16E Modified is

generally inconsistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan because it would impact future City development planned for the area south of Oncken Road. However, Alternative 16E Modified does not split this Planned Development Area to the same extent as Alternative 16E.

(3) Town of Westport Comprehensive Plan: Alternative 16E Modified is

generally inconsistent with the Town’s Comprehensive Plan because it would be located south of Dorn Creek and Oncken Road. This area is

Figure 4.0-5 Alternative 16E Modified Impacts



designated for commercial near County Q, then agricultural, residential, and open space closer to County M.


Alternative 16E Modified closely mirrors the travel desire lines described in Section 1. The distance from the County Q to the County M/K junction is 2.1 miles.

3. Alternative 5E

a. Direct Impacts

The direct impacts associated with Alternative 5E are shown in Figure 4.0-6. Mapping this alternative will cover about 87.5 acres; 62.1 acres are agricultural and the remaining 25.4 acres are residential and business. The alternative travels north of County K and severs the Hellenbrand farm. There are four business relocations and two residential relocation associated with this alternative. Most are near the connection of the North Mendota Parkway with County M but one residential relocation occurs near the junction with County Q.


See Section 1.04 of the screening report summaries of the plans referenced below and a statement regarding how consistency with each plan was evaluated.

Figure 4.0-6 Alternative 5E Impacts



(1) The City of Middleton Northwest Quadrant Plan: Alternative 5E is generally consistent with the City’s Northwest Quadrant Plan because it would be located north of Oncken Road and would not bisect the area south of Oncken Road planned for future City development.

(2) The City of Middleton Comprehensive Plan: Alternative 5E is generally

consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan because it is located north of Oncken Road and would not bisect the area planned for future City development.

(3) The Town of Westport Comprehensive Plan: Alternative 4E is less

consistent with the Town’s Comprehesnive Plan than Alternative 5E because it would sever an active farm (Hellenbrand) and would result in negative impacts to the existing commercial development located at the intersection of County K and County M.


Alternative 5E is fartherst north near the south of the western alignments and closely mirrors the travel desire lines described in Section 1. The distance from County Q to the County M/K junction is 1.5 miles.

5.0 IMPACT SUMMARY Table 5.0-1 summarizes the direct impacts of the alternatives. Since each west alternative can only be coupled with the corresponding east alternative, they are presented only as full alternatives. Table 5.0-2 further summarizes other factors associated with the alternatives.

FULL ALTERNATIVES AG RES BUS ENV.

CORRIDOR Total WETLAND RELOCATION DIST 5 ALIGNMENT 157.5 0.0 3.8 51.0 212.3 4.1 6

LOCAL ROADS 4.1 0.8 2.1 0.0 7.0 0 0

TOTAL 161.6 0.8 5.9 51.0 219.3 4.1 6 6.2

16 ALIGNMENT 201.3 13.0 14.1 15.1 243.5 3.2 6

LOCAL ROADS 9.1 0.9 0.0 4.4 14.4 0.8 0

TOTAL 210.4 13.9 14.1 19.5 257.9 4.0 6 5.5

16

Mod ALIGNMENT 163.1 16.6 0.1 51.4 231.2 2.5 14

LOCAL ROADS 55.4 14.5 0.1 30.2 100.2 0.4 0

TOTAL 218.5 31.1 0.2 81.6 331.4 2.9 14 5.4

Table 5.0-1 Alternative Direct Impacts

NO

RTH

ME

ND

OTA

EN

VIR

ON

ME

NT

AL

AN

D T

RA

NS

PO

RTA

TIO

N S

TU

DY

ALL

ALI

GN

ME

NTS

DA

NE

CO

UN

TY P

AR

K D

EP

AR

TM

EN

TD

AN

E C

OU

NTY

, WIS

CO

NS

IN

FIGURE 11-124.006

T o w n o f W e s t p o r t

T o w n o f S p r i n g f i e l d

V i l l a g e o fW a u n a k e e

L a k eM e n d o t a

C i t y o fM i d d l e t o n

C i t y o fM i d d l e t o n

Phe

asan

t Bra

nch

Roa

d

Upland Trail

Riles Road

Par

men

ter S

treet

Fisher Road

Heron Trail

Schneider Road

Indianola Drive

K County Highway

Borc

hers

Beac

h R

oad

Balzer Road

Ram

ps

M C

ount

y H

ighw

ay

Greenbriar Road

Cobblestone Lane

Sumac Road

Oncken Road

Perch Park

Ram

ps

Unnamed

Mans field

Road

Ram

ps

Grassland Trail

Meffert Road

Briggs R oad

Reis Road

Q C

ount

y H

ighw

ayRedtai

l Pass

Ro ck Crest Roa

d

Bellewood Drive

Sandhil l Drive

12 U

nited States

Highw

ay

Har

dy Tr

ail

No rth

Sh o re

Bay

Drive

Fo

xfire

Trail

Phe

asan

t Bra

nch

Roa

d

Hig

h R

oad

Surrey Lane

Sh i

lling

L ane

Sumac Circle

S:\MAD\1100--1199\1124\006\Data\GIS\Figures\Alignments\Alignment All Alignments 11x17.mxd

0 750 1,500375

Feet

Legend4

4 Local Road

5

5 Local Road

12E

12E Local Road

13

13 Local Road

14W

14W Local Road

15W

15W Local Road

16

16 Local Road

16 Modified

16 Modified Local Road

Connector A

Connector B

Connector B Local Road

NORTH MENDOTA PARKWAY - Dane County,...

Documents

Transcript of NORTH MENDOTA PARKWAY - Dane County,...